NOV  l'  1966 


Z^C 


'■IHiHM. » 


t*^ 


13/ 


^  ,  [y   NO"    17    — 

LECTURES'     ^c 


ON    THE 


Augsburg  Confession, 


ox    THE 


HOLMAN  FOUNDATION. 

DELIVERED    IN    THE    THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARY  OF 

THE  GENERAL  SYNOD  OF  THE  EVANGELICAL 

LUTHERAN  CHURCH,  GETTYSBURG,  PA. 


FIRST  SERIES.    1866-1886. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

lutiii:rax  publication  S()cip:ty 
1888. 


Copyright,  1888, 

BY 

THE  LUTHERAN  PUBLICATION  SOCIETY. 


PREFACE    ■ 

THE  following  Lectures  appear  in  book  form,  through  a  request 
of  the  Lutheran  Publication  Society,  made  at  its  meeting  in 
Omaha,  Neb.,  June,  1887. 

A  sufficient  number  of  subscriptions  having  been  received  in 
advance  to  justify  the  expense  of  publication,  a  limited  edition  of 
the  work  is  published. 

The  Lectures  are  printed  in  their  full  and  complete  form  as 
originally  delivered,  except  that  in  several  of  the  Lectures  there 
is  an  omission  of  a  few  brief  statements  which  do  not  affect  the 
discussion. 

An  extended  specific  index  to  the  entire  work  may  be  found  at 
the  end  of  the  volume. 

3 


CONTENTS 


ARTICLE 

I.    The  Trinity. 
1 1 .   Original  Sin . 

III.  T/ie  Person  and  Work  of  Chris/. 

IV.  Justification  by  Faith. 

V.    The  Office  of  the  Ministry. 
VI.  New  Obedience. 
VII.    The  Church. 
VIII.   The  Church  as  It  Is. 
t^^lX.  Baptism. 

X.    The  Lord' s  Supper. 
XI.   Confession. 
XII.  Repentance. 
/^OCIII.    Use  of  the  Sacraments. 
fy^lY.   The  Call  to  the  Ministry. 

XV.  Human  Ordinances  in  the  Church. 
XVI.   Civil  Polity  and  Government. 
C^  XVII.   Christ's  Return  to  Judgment. 
XVIII.  Free  Will. 
XIX.    The  Cause  of  Sin. 
XX.  Relation  of  Faith  and  Good  Works. 
XXI.   The  Invocatioti  of  Saints. 


PAGE 

By  J.  A.  Brown,  D.  D.,  LL.D.  5 

By  S.  Sprecher,   D.  D.,  LL.D.  40 

By  S.  S.  Schmucker,  D.  D.    .  68 

By  M.  Valentine,  D.  D.,  LL.D.  107 

By  C.  A.  Hay,  D.  D 147 


By  C.  A.  Stork,  D.  D.  . 
By  J.  G.  Morris,  D.  D., 
By  H.  Ziegler,  D.  D.   . 
By  F.  W.  Conrad,  D.  D 
By  G.  Diehl,  D.  D.  .    . 
By  A.  C.  Wedekind,  D. 
By  S.  W.  Harkey,  D.  D 
By  W.  M.  Baum,  D.  D. 
By  L.  A.  Gotwald,  D.  D 
By  S.  A.  Holman,  D.  D 
By  L.  E.  Albert,  D.  D. 
By  E.  J.  Wolf,  D.  D.   . 
By  H.  L.  Baugher,  D.  D 
By  S.  A.  Repass,  D.  D 
By  E.  Huber,  D,  D.  .  . 
By  J.  C.  Koller,  D.  D. 
4 


184 
LL.D.  215 


227 
256 
326 
356 
379 
398 
451 
546 
588 
627 
697 
726 
767 
834 


ARTICLE  I. 


THE   TRINITY. 

BY  J.  A.  BROWN,  D.  D.,  LL.D. 


Introduction.* 

BY  the  terms  of  this  foundation  "the  lecturer  may  select  one,  and 
but  one,  of  the  twenty-one  Doctrinal  Articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession :  but  no  one  Article  shall  be  chosen  twice,  until  all  shall 
have  been  lectured  upon."  The  design  is  that  this  Confession  may 
be  thus  more  thoroughly  examined,  its  doctrines  better  understood, 
and  thus  both  ministers  and  people  become  more  familiar  with  the 
faith  so  nobly  confessed  by  the  heroes  of  the  great  Reformation. 
To  that  Confession,  and  to  it  alone,  so  far  as  human  creeds  or  con- 
fessions are  concerned,  the  General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical  Luth- 
eran Church,  in  her  Constitution,  acknowledges  allegiance.  Stand- 
ing on  the  broad  basis  of  Lutheran  catholicity,  she  receives  it  as  "  a 
correct  exhibition  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Divine  Word, 
and  of  the  faith  of  our  Church  founded  upon  that  Word,"  but  clings 

*  To  the  Rev.  Samuel  A.  Holman  belongs  the  distinguished  honor  of  having 
originated  and  founded  a  Lectureship  on  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Theological  Seminary  of  the  General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  the  United  States.  So  far  as  we  know,  this  is  the  first 
foundation  of  the  kind,  not  only  in  the  Church  in  these  United  States,  but  in 
the  world  :  and  whilst  the  benevolent  founder  has  thus  shown  a  commendable 
zeal  for  this  venerable  Symbol  of  our  Church — the  mother  Symbol  of  Protest- 
anism,  and  only  universal  Symbol  of  Lutheranism — he  will  rear  for  himself  a 
monument  the  most  noble  and  imperishable.  What  his  modest  nature  never 
once  thought  of,  will  be  all  the  more  certainly  secured,  and  the  name  of  Samuel 
A.  Holman  will  henceforth,  and  through  all  time,  be  identified  with  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  and  the  Theological  Seminary  of  the  General  Synod. 

2  5 


6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

to    the   "Word    of  God  as  the    only   infalHble    rule   of  faith    and 
practice." 

Feeling  myself  highly  honored  by  being  selected  to  deliver  the 
first  lecture  under  this  provision,  and  left  thus  free  to  select  any  one 
of  the  Doctrinal  Articles  as  the  subject  of  discussion,  I  have  con- 
cluded that,  waiving  all  personal  predilections,  and  all  considera- 
tions growing  out  of  the  special  interest  felt,  at  this  time,  by  the 
Church  in  certain  Articles,  the  least  objectionable,  and  upon  the 
whole  the  best  course,  is  to  begin  at  the  beginning.  This  will  leave 
no  room  for  any  suspicion  of  sinister  design,  or  of  taking  advantage 
of  the  opportunity  to  thrust  upon  the  Church  an  unwelcome  discus- 
sion. To  others  will  be  left  the  task  of  discussing  the  topics  around 
which  the  conflict  has  raged  in  the  Church  for  centuries.  It  will 
be  ours  to  examine  and  defend  one  of  the  great  doctrines  of  the 
"common  faith."  The  first  Article  of  the  Confession  will  accord- 
ingly be  the  subject  of  the  present  lecture. 

I. 

Augsburg  Confession.     Article  I. 

Any  account  of  the  origin  of  this  Confession,  as  well  as  any  at- 
tempt at  eulogy  upon  it,  would  be  here  as  much  out  of  place  as  it 
would  be  unnecessary.  We  must,  therefore,  omit  all  notice  of  the 
stirring  times,  and  the  illustrious  men,  that  gave  to  the  Church  and 
the  world  this  most  important  and  most  celebrated  Confession  of 
our  Protestant  Christianity.  The  Reformers  justly  and  truly  main- 
tained that  they  were  not  founding  a  new  Church,  nor  introducing 
a  new  and  strange  faith,  but  were  aiming  to  purify  the  Church  from 
corrupt  doctrines  and  abuses,  which  had  crept  in,  and  to  lead  her 
back  to  the  pure  faith  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  and  of  the  Church 
universal  in  the  early  centuries.  Hence  the  very  first  sentence  of  the 
first  Article  makes  mention  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  confesses  the 
faith  as  settled  in  the  Church  twelve  centuries  before,  and  since  that 
time,  among  orthodox  believers,  universally  received.  The  divine 
existence,  and  constitution  of  the  Godhead — the  trinity  of  persons 
in  unity  of  essence,  as  "  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  things  visible 
and  invisible,"  accompanied  by  a  notice  of  the  leading  errors  op- 
posed to  it,  which  are  condemned  and  rejected,  the  authors  of  the 
Confession  placed  first,  as  the  great  fundamental  truth,  underlying 


THE    TRINITY.  7 

all  other  divine  truth,  and  all  true  religion.     This  Article,  so  appro 
priately  placed  first,  reads  as  follows :  * 

"Our  Churches  unanimously  hold  and  teach,  agreeably  to  the 
Decree  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  that  there  is  only  one  Divine 
Essence,  which  is  called,  and  truly  is,  God ;  but  that  there  are  three 
persons  in  this  one  Divine  Essence,  equally  powerful,  equally  eter- 
nal,— God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  God  the  Holy  Ghost, — who  are 
one  Divine  Essence,  eternal,  incorporeal,  indivisible,  infinite  in  power, 
wisdom  and  goodness,  the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  things  visi- 
ble and  invisible.  And  the  word  person  is  not  intended  to  express 
a  part  or  quality  of  another,  but  that  which  subsists  of  itself,  pre- 
cisely as  the  Fathers  have  employed  this  term  on  this  subject. 

"  Every  heresy  opposed  to  this  Article  is,  therefore,  condemned : 
as  that  of  the  Manichaeans,  who  assume  two  principles,  the  one  good, 
the  other  evil.  Likewise  the  heresies  of  the  Valentinians,  Arians, 
Eunomians,  Mahometans,  and  the  like;  also  that  of  the  ancient  and 
modern  Samosatenians,  who  admit  .but  one  person,  and  sophistically 
explain  away  these  two, — the  Word  and  the  Holy  Spirit, — asserting 
that  they  must  not  be  viewed  as  distinct  persons,  but  that  the  Word 

*  The  basis  of  this  first  Article  of  the  Confession  is  as  follows : 

1.  The  first  of  the  Marburg  Articles  as  agreed  upon  by  the  Lutherans  and 
Reformed,  October  3d,  1529:  "We  believe  and  hold  that  there  is  one  true, 
living  God,  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  all  creatures,  and  that  this  same 
God,  one  in  essence  and  nature,  is  threefold  in  person,  that  is  to  say,  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  as  was  declared  in  the  Council  of  Nice,  and  is  still  taught 
by  the  universal  Christian  Church." 

2.  The  first  of  the  Swabach  Articles,  as  altered  and  enlarged  from  the  Mar- 
burg Article,  October  i6th,  1529:  "We  confess  that  constantly»and  with  great 
accord  it  is  taught  among  us,  that  there  is  one  only  true  God,  Creator  of  heaven 
and  earth  ;  yet  so,  that  in  this  only  true  Divine  Essence,  there  are  three  distinct 
persons,  to  wit:  GoD  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  God  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  and 
that  the  Son,  begotten  of  the  Father  from  eternity,  is  truly  and  by  nature  God 
with  the  Father:  and  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  proceeding  from  eternity  from  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  is  truly  and  by  nature  God  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  : 
as  all  these  things  can  be  most  clearly  and  firmly  demonstrated  by  Scripture, 
John  i:  '  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the 
Word  was  God.  All  things  were  made  by  him.'  Matthew  xxviii. :  '  Go  and  teach 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost:'  and  many  other  like  passages,  especially  in  the  Gospel  of 
John." 

We  have  availed  ourselves  of  the  English  translation  of  these  Articles  in  the 
Ev.  Review,  Vol.  X,  474 ;  II,  78. 


8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

signifies   the  oral  word  or  voice,  and   that  the    Holy  Ghost  is  the 
principle  of  motion  in  things."* 

In  this  Article  the  Church  of  the  Reformation  is  placed  fully  and 
distinctly  on  the  faith  of  the  old  ecumenical  creed  of  the  Council  of 
Nice;    or,    more    strictly    the    Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan    Symbol. 

*  The  translation  of  the  Article  given  above  is  that  of  the  Newmarket  Enghsh 
copy,  Second  Edition,  revised  by  C.  P.  Krauth,  Sen.,  D.  D.  It  differs  somewhat 
in  form,  but  not  in  meaning,  from  the  Original — a  copy  of  which  is  subjoined  in 
German  and  Ladn,  from  Miiller's  Edition,  1848. 

Der  I.  Artikel.     Von  Gott.  Art.  I.     De  Deo. 

"  Erstlich   wird    eintrachtiglich    ge-  "  Ecclesias  magno  consensu  apud  nos 

lehret  und  gehalten,  laut  des  Beschluss  docent,  decretum  Nicaenae  synodi  de 

Concilii  Nicaeni,  dass  ein  einig  gottlich  unitate  essentia   divinae  et  de  tribiis 

Wesen  sei,  welches  genannt  wird  und  personis  verum  et  sine  uUa  dubitatione 

wahrhaftiglich  ist  Gott,  und  sind  doch  credendum  esse.     Videlicet,  quod   sit 

drei   Personen   in  demselben   einigen  una  essentia  divina,  quae  et  appellatu- 

gottlichen     Wesen,     gleich     gewaUig,  et  est  Ueus,  aeternus,  incorporeus,  im- 

gleich    ewig,    Gott   Vater,  Gott   Sohn,  partibilis,  immensa  potentia,  sapientia, 

Gott  heiliger  Geist,  alle  drei  ein  gotthch  bonitate  creator  et  conservator  omnium 

Wesen,  ewig,  ohne  Stiick,  ohne  End,  rerum    visibilium    et    invisibilium ;    et 

unermesslicher  Macht,  Weisheit   und  tamen  tres  sint  personee   ejusdem  es- 

Giite,  ein  Schopfer  und  Erhalter  aller  sentiae     et     potential,     et     coaeternae, 

sichtbaren     und    unsichtbaren     Ding.  Pater,   Filius  et  Spiritus   Sanctus.     Et 

Und    wird   durch    das   Wort    Persona  nomine  pcrsoiiae  utuntur  ea  significa- 

verstanden  nicht  ein  Stiick,  nicht  ein  tione,  qua  usi  sunt  in  hac  causa  scrip- 

Eigenschaft  in  einen  andern,  sondern  tores    ecclesiastici,    ut    significet    non 

das  selbst  bestehet,  wie  denn  die  Vater  partem  aut  qualitatem  in  aho,  sed  quod 

m  dieser  Sachen  dies  Wort  gebraucht  propria  subsistit. 
haben. 

"  Derhalben'werden  verworfen  alle  "  Damnant  omnes  haereses,  contra 

Ketzereien  so  diesem  Artikel  zuwider  hunc  articulum  exortas,  ut  Manichaeos, 

sind,  also  Manichai,  die  zween  Gotter  qui  duo  principia  ponebant,  bonum  et 

gesetzt  haben,  ein  bosen  und  ein  guten.  malum,  item  Valentinianos,   Arianos, 

Item  Valentiniani,  Ariani,  Eunomiani,  Eunomianos,  Mahometistas  et  omnes 

Mahometisten    und    alle   dergleichen,  horum  similes.     Damnant  et  Samosa- 

auch  Samosateni,  alt  und  neu,  so  nur  tenos  veteres  et  neotericos,  qui  quum 

eine    Person    setzen   und   von    diesen  tantum  unam  personam  esse  contend- 

zweien,  Wort  und  heiligem  Geist,  So-  ant,    de    Verbo   et   de   Spiritu    Sancto 

phisterei  machen  und  sagen,  dass  es  astute  et  impie  rhetoricantur,  quod  non 

nicht  miissen  unterschiedene  Personen  sint  personte  distinctas,  sed  quod  Ver- 

sein,   sondern   Wort   bedeute   leiblich  bum  significet  verbum  vocaleet  Spiritus 

Wort  oderStimme,  und  der  heilige  Geist  motum  in  rebus  creatum." 
sei  erschaffene  Regung  in  Kreaturen." 

For  the  varia;  lectiones  see  Miiller's  Edition,  S.  B.  866-907. 


THE    TRINITY.  9 

The  Creed  of  the  Nicene  Council  was  somewhat  enlarged  and  im- 
proved at  the  first  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.,  381,  and  as 
such  was  commonly  spoken  of  as  the  Nicene  Creed.  It  is  in  this 
amended  form  that  it  has  been  introduced  into  the  Symbolical  Books 
of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  it  is  to  this  Creed  that  reference  is  had 
in  this  first  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.* 

Nicene  Creed. 

As  the  doctrine  of  the  Godhead — "One  Divine  Essence"  and 
"three  persons,"  trinity  in  unity,  and  unity  in  trinity — received  its 
creed  form  in  this  Symbol,  and  has  received  no  additions  or  alterations 
since,  and  is  not  likely  to,  it  must  be  deeply  interesting  and  instruc- 
tive to  examine  what  was  settled  so  firmly  in  that  Confession.  A 
doctrinal  statement  that  has  stood  for  more  than  fifteen  centuries, 
unchallenged  by  the' orthodox  churches,  and  as  an  impregnable  bul- 
wark against  all  heresies  and  heretics,  on  this  point,  must  command 
our  admiring  attention.  "  It  implies,"  says  Stanley,  "an  immense 
vitality,  inherent  in  the  orthodox  doctrine  established  at  Nicaea, 
that  it  should  have  won  its  way  against  such  formidable  antagonists, 
and  should  have  securely  seated  itself  in  the  heart  of  the  Church 
for  so  many  subsequent  centuries." 

The  doctrines  of  our  holy  religion  are  not  delivered  in  the  Bible 
in  systematic  order,  nor  in  dogmatic  form.  We  are  left  to  construct 
a  system  from  the  ample  materials  provided,  and  to  give  to  each 
doctrine  its  proper  form  and  place.  Our  present  systems  of  faith 
have  been  wrought  out,  amid  many  struggles,  in  the  life  and  con- 
sciousness of  the  Church,  and  must  be  tested  by  the  sure  Word  of 
God.  It  is  not  at  all  strange,  therefore,  that  in  the  early  Church  there 
soon  appeared  some  difference  in  the  manner  of  stating  certain  doc- 
trines, and  especially  in  regard  to  the  Trinity.  At  the  first,  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  were  worshipped  as  divine;  but  when  men  be- 
gan to  speculate  and  define  they  soon  found  difficulties,  and  these  dif- 
ficulties leading  to  differences.  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinit}',  underly- 
ing and  moulding  as  it  must  all  the  other  great  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity, was  the  first  to  receive  the  earnest  attention  of  the  Church. 

*  On  the  relation  between  the  Nicene  and  Nica^no-Constantinopolitan  Creeds, 
see  Walch's  Introductio  in  Lib.  Sym.  1 21-159.  Miiller's  S.  B.  Intro.  XLV'I- 
L.  Stanley's  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,  242,  with  the  Church  Histories  of 
that  period  generally. 


lO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Not  now  to  speak  of  minor  differences  and  diversities,  the  period 
of  the  Nicene  Council  exhibits  two  prominent  conflicting  tendencies, 
the  one  to  hold  to  the  unity  of  the  divine  essence  at  the  expense  of 
the  personality  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost;  the  other  to  hold  to 
a  trinity  of  persons,  so  distinct  and  unlike,  differing  in  kind  as  well 
as  degree,  as  to  utterly  deny  the  unity  of  the  divine  essence.  By 
the  former,  the  divinity  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not 
denied;  but  all  three  were  regarded  as  one,  not  only  in  essence,  but 
without  any  proper  distinction  of  persons.  The  Son  was  God,  but 
not  a  distinct  personality,  or  different  from  the  Father.  The  Holy 
Ghost  was  God,  but  also  without  any  distinction  in  personality  from 
the  Father  or  the  Son.  The  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  were 
only  different  manifestations  of  the  one  same  essence  and  person ; 
or  one  God  acting  in  different  modes,  and  under  different  relations. 
According  to  this  view  there  is  no  real  distinction  between  the  es- 
sence and  the  personality  of  the  Godhead.  There  is  one  essence, 
and  but  one  person,  though  this  one  person  may  reveal  himself  to 
us  under  different  relations,  and  as  performing  different  offices,  cor- 
responding with  the  terms  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  The  op- 
posite tendency  was  to  hold  to  a  trinity  of  persons,  yet  so  distinct 
as  to  deny  the  unity  of  essence.  The  Son  was  not  only  a  different 
person,  but  also  differing  in  essence  from  the  Father.  He  might  be 
allowed  to  possess  a  nature  or  essence  similar  to  that  of  God, 
Sfioioi'ciov,  but  not  identical  with  it,  6/uoovaiov.  The  Father  alone  is  true 
and  absolute  God,  the  Son  is  of  a  different  essence  and  order- 
Their  natures  are  essentially  distinct.  The  Son  was  created  or  pro- 
duced by  the  Father,  and  must  differ  from  him.  There  was  less 
attention  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  if  allowed  to  be  a 
person,  it  was  as  a  creature,  made  by  the  Father,  through  the  Son- 
Neither  Son  nor  Holy  Ghost  was  identical  in  essence  with  the 
Father,  but  belongs  to  the  order  of  beings  created  or  produced,  and 
is  not  one  with  God.* 

These  two  tendencies  witnessed  many  diversities  on  either  side, 
but  the  result  was  to  deny  the  unity  of  the  essence  or  the  trinity  of 

*  For  a  fuller  and  more  satisfactory  account  of  what  can  only  be  touched 
upon  in  this  Lecture,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  histories  of  that  period,  and  to 
Hagenbach's  Hist,  of  Doct.,  Vol.  I ;  also  Shedd's  Hist,  of  Doct.,  Vol.  I,  246- 
375  ;  Cudworth's  Int.  Sys.,  and  Dorner's  great  work. 


THE   TRINITY.  ^  II 

persons.  To  correct  both  of  these,  and  present  in  true  form  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  was  the  work  of  the  Nicene  Council.* 

The  immediate  occasion  of  that  famous  Council  was  the  teaching 
ofArius,  a  presbyter  in  the  Church  at  Alexandria.  Carrying  out 
more  fully  and  logically  Origen's  doctrine  of  generation  and  subor- 
dination, with  the  distinction  of  essence  between  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  he  was  led  to  deny  the  true  divinity  of  the  latter.  He  could 
not  recognize  a  third  essence  between  that  of  divinity  and  the  crea- 
ture, and  so  boldly  maintained  that  the  Son  was  only  a  created 
being — the  first  and  most  exalted  of  all  creatures,  but  still  a  created 
being.  "We  must,"  says  Arius,  "either  suppose  two  divine  orig- 
inal essences  without  beginning,  and  independent  of  each  other;  we 
must  substitute  a  Dyarchy  in  place  of  the  Monarchy;  or  we  must 
not  shrink  from  asserting  that  the  Logos  had  a  beginning  of  his 
existence,  that  there  was  a  moment  when  he  did  not  as  yet  exist." 
The  doctrine  ofArius  was  condemned  by  his  own  bishop,  Alexan- 
der, and  also  by  a  Council  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  321.  But  this  did 
not  silence  the  heretic,  or  stop  the  spread  of  his  doctrine.  Like 
poison  it  infused  itself  into  the  Church,  and  the  baneful  effects  were 
soon  manifest.  Division  and  strife,  the  natural  result  of  false  teach- 
ing, followed,  and  the  Church  was  greatly  convulsed.  To  produce 
harmony,  and  settle  the  true  faith,  Constantine  was  moved  to  call  a 
general  Council  at  Nice  in  Bithynia,  A.  D.  325. 

Every  thing  conspired  to  give  importance  and  eclat  to  this  Coun- 
cil. The  place  of  meeting — "the  second  Capital  of  Bithynia,"  and 
so  accessible  by  land  and  water — the  presence  and  interest  of  the 
Emperor  Constantine,  the  number  of  bishops  and  other  clergy,  its 
being  the  first  of  the  so-called  General  Councils,  the  important  doc- 
trine to  be  settled,  all  these  combined  to  render  it  an  occasion  of  no 
ordinary  interest.     The  attendance  of  three  hundred  and  eighteen 

*  "  The  homoousian  Trinity  of  the  orthodox  went  exactly  in  the  middle,  be- 
twixt that  monoousian  Trinity  of  Sabellius,  which  was  a  Trinity  of  different 
notions  or  conceptions  only  of  one  and  the  selfsame  thing,  and  that  other  hete- 
roousian  Trinity  of  Arius,  which  was  a  Trinity  of  separate  and  heterogeneous 
substances  (one  of  which  only  was  God,  and  the  other  creatures),  this  being  a 
Trinity  of  hypostases  or  persons  numerically  differing  from  one  another,  but 
all  of  them  agreeing  in  one  common  or  general  essence  of  the  God-head  or  the 
uncreated  nature,  which  is  eternal  and  infinite."  Cudworth's  Int.  Sys.,  Vol.  I, 
803.     (Andover.) 


12  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

bishops,  besides  a  vast  number  of  other  clergy  and  visitors,  together 
with  the  presence  of  the  Emperor,  made  it  one  of  the  most  august 
bodies  that  ever  assembled.*  The  result  of  their  deliberations,  dis- 
cussions and  decisions,  is  what  we  now  have  to  do  with. 

The  main  point  to  be  determined  was  the  nature  of  the  Son,  and 
His  relation  to  the  Father.  The  Arians  and  Semi-Arians  were 
willing  to  admit  that  Christ  was  God,  but  explained  it  in  their  own 
way.  The  usual  forms  of  expression  they  could  subscribe,  and 
still  maintain  their  own  opinions.  The  trouble  was  to  detect  and 
make  bare  the  subtile  error  that  was  corrupting  the  faith  and  endan- 
gering the  very  life  of  the  Church.  One  magical  word  solved  the 
difficulty,  and,  like  Ithuriel's  spear,  pierced  the  delusive  veil  by 
which  this  heresy  thought  to  cover  itself.  The  word  o/ioovaiov  had 
been  rejected  and  condemned  by  the  Council  at  Antioch,  as  favoring 
Sabellianism,  and  when  introduced  at  the  Council  of  Nice  produced 
very  great  excitement.  It  was  denounced  by  the  heretics  as  absurd. 
But  this  only  led  the  orthodox  party  to  look  upon  it  with  more 
favor,  and  then  to  seize  upon  it  as  the  very  word  needed.  It  served 
the  very  purpose,  and  was  about  the  only  word  that  Arius  and  his 
friends  could  not  subscribe.  They  could  say  the  Son  was  divine, 
of  like  nature  or  essence,  dfioiovaiov,  with  the  Father.  But  other 
beings  might  be  of  like  nature  with  God,  and  yet  not  be  very  God. 
There  Avas  room  for  equivocation  and  concealment  here.  The 
Council  declared  the  Son  to  be  u/uoovgiov,  "  consubstantial,"  of  the 
same  essence  with  the  Father.  This  word  admitted  of  no  equivoca- 
tion. It  declared  the  Father  and  the  Son  to  be  of  one  essence,  and 
hence  removed  the  Son  to  an  infinite  distance  from  all  created 
beings.  The  Council  further  declared  him  to  be  "begotten,  not 
made,"  and  condemned  those  who  say  "there  was  when  he  was 
not,"  and  "before  he  was  begotten  he  was  not,"  and  "that  he  came 
into  existence  from  what  was  not." 

The  Creed  adopted  at  this  Council,  like  all  the  ancient  Creeds, 
was  very  brief,  but  it  formed  a  most  important  era  in  the  history  of 
the  Church,  and  of  Christian  doctrine.  No  form  of  doctrine  has 
been  more  widely  received,  or  cherished  with  a  more  profound  re- 
gard.    "Throughout   the  Eastern   Church,"  says  Stanley,  " the  Ni- 

*  For  a  very  interesting  and  instructive  account  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  with 
authorities,  see  Stanley's  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,  114-280.  Also  Nean- 
der.  Vol.  11,  372-386. 


THE    TRINITY.  I3 

cene  Creed  is  still  the  one  bond  of  faith.  It  is  still  recited  in  its 
original  tongue  by  the  peasants  of  Greece.  Its  recitation  is  still  the 
culminating  point  of  the  service  in  the  Church  of  Russia.  The 
great  bell  of  the  Kremlin  tower  sounds  during  the  whole  time  that 
its  words  are  chanted.  It  is  repeated  aloud  in  the  presence  of  the 
assembled  people  by  the  Czar  at  his  coronation.  It  is  worked  in 
pearls  on  the  robes  of  the  highest  dignitaries  of  Moscow.  One  of 
the  main  grounds  of  schism  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies from  the  established  Church  of  Russia,  was  that  the  old  dis- 
senters were  seized  with  the  belief  that  the  patriarch  Nicon  had 
altered  one  of  the  sacred  words  of  the  original  text  of  the  Creed."* 
This  Creed  was  afterwards  altered  and  amended  so  as  to  include 
a  more  distinct  acknowledgment  of  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost  did  not  receive  special  attention  at 

*  The  history  of  this  Nicene  Creed  furnishes,  however,  a  very  interesting  and 
instructive  lesson  on  unaltered  and  unalterable  Confessions.  It  "was  meant  to 
be,"  says  Stanley,  "an  end  of  theological  controversy."  The  "Word  of  the 
Lord  which  was  given  in  the  CEcumenical  Council  of  Nicaea,"  says  Athanasius, 
"  remaineth  forever."  To  it  was  applied  the  text,  "Remove  not  the  ancient 
landmarks  which  the  fathers  have  set."  No  addition  was  contemplated  :  it  was 
of  itself  sufficient  to  refute  every  heresy.  *  *  *  The  Council  of  Sardica  de- 
clared that  it  was  amply  sufficient,  and  that  no  second  Creed  should  ever  ap- 
pear. When  the  next  General  Council  met  in  381,  at  Constantinople,  although 
it  had  to  confront  two  new  heresies — those  of  Appollonius  and  Macedonius— it 
did  not  venture  to  do  more  than  recite  the  original  Creed  of  Nica?a.  The  ad- 
ditions which  now  appear  in  that  Creed,  and  which  are  commonly  ascribed  to 
the  Fathers  of  Constantinople,  did,  probably,  then  make  their  appearance. 
But  they  were  not  drawn  up  by  that'  Council.  *  *  The  divines  of  Ephesus 
showed  their  sense  of  the  finalty  of  the  Nicene  Creed  still  more  strongly. 
After  reciting  it  aloud,  in  its  original  form,  they  decreed  ■•■  *  that  hencefor- 
ward no  one  should  "propose,  or  write,  or  compose  any  other  Creed  than  that 
defined  by  the  Fathers  in  the  city  of  Nica^a,"  under  pain  of  deposition  from 
clerical  office  if  they  were  clergy,  and  of  excommunication  if  they  were  laymen. 
After  mentioning  "the  changes  of  the  most  unchangeable  of  all  Creeds,"  the 
historian  adds:  "  Every  time  that  the  Creed  is  recited  with  its  additions  and 
omissions,  it  conveys  to  us  the  wholesome  warning,  that  our  faith  is  not  of  ne- 
cessity bound  up  with  the  literal  text  of  Creeds,  or  with  the  formal  decrees  of 
Councils.  It  existed  before  the  Creed  was  drawn  up  ;  it  is  larger  than  the  letter 
of  any  Creed  could  circumscribe.  The  fact  that  the  whole  Christian  world  has 
altered  the  Creed  of  Niciva,  and  broken  the  decree  of  Ephesus,  without  ceasing 
to  be  catholic  or  Christian,  is  a  decisive  proof  that  common  sense,  after  all,  is 
the  supreme  arbiter,  and  corrective  even  of  Gicumenical  Councils."  Stanley, 
242-246. 


14  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  Council  of  Nice.  No  question  having  at  that  time  arisen,  on 
this  point,  it  was  deemed  sufficient  to  confess  their  faith  in  the 
words — after  belief  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  etc. — "And  in  the  Holy 
Ghost."  But  when  afterwards  false  and  dangerous  doctrines  con- 
cerning the  Holy  Ghost  were  introduced  and  advocated  by  Mace- 
donius,  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381,  the  doctrine 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  more  fully  set  forth,  as  follows:  "And  (we 
believe)  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord,  the  Giver  of  life,  who  pro- 
ceeds from  the  Father,  who  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  to  be 
worshipped  and  glorified,  and  who  spake  through  the  prophets. 
Other  alterations  were  made,  especially  the  addition  of  the  famous 
"filioque"  by  the  Western  Church,  but  of  which  we  have  not  time 
to  speak  here.  Thus  completed,  the  Creed  is  known  in  our  Church 
as  the  Nicene,  but  more  strictly  should  be  called  the  Nicaeno-Con- 
stantinopolitan  Creed.* 

*  The  original  of  these  Creeds  may  be  readily  seen  in  a  number  of  works  ac- 
cessible to  most  readers  of  the  Review,  as  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  Appendix, 
593,  597;  Miiller's  S.  B.  Intro,  xlvii,  xlviii;  Gieseler's  Church  History,  Vol.  I, 
297,  312,  etc.  A  translation  of  both  is  subjoined,  that  the  reader  may  be  able 
to  compare. 

NiCEXE. — "  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  all  things 
visible  and  invisible: 

"And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father,  only 
begotten,  that  is,  of  the  substance  of  the  Father;  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light, 
very  God  of  very  God ;  begotten,  not  made ;  of  the  same  substance  with  the 
Father;  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  that  are  in  heaven  and  that  are  in 
earth ;  who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  came  down,  and  was  made  flesh, 
and  became  man,  suffered,  and  rose  again  the  third  day,  ascended  into  the 
heavens,  and  will  come  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead. 

"And  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  But  those  who  say,  there  was  when  he  was  not,  and  that  before  He  was  be- 
gotten He  was  not,  and  that  He  came  into  existence  from  what  was  not ;  or 
profess  that  He  is  of  a  different  substance  or  essence,  or  that  the  Son  of  God  is 
created,  mutable  or  changeable,  the  Catholic  Church  anathematizes."  • 

NiCiENO-CoNSTANTiNOPOLiTAN. — "We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty, Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible. 

"And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the 
Father  before  all  worlds  ;  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God ;  begotten,  not 
made  ;  of  the  same  substance  with  the  Father  ;  by  whom  all  things  were  made; 
who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  came  down  from  heaven,  and  was  made 
flesh  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  became  man,  and  was  cruci- 
fied for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate,  and  sufl"ered,  and  was  buried,  and  rose  again  the 
third  day,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  ascended  into  the  heavens,  and  sits 


THE    TRINITY.  I  5 

Thus  much  has  been  said  of  the  history  of  this  Creed,  because  the 
Reformers  made  its  doctrine  that  of  their  Confession,  and  it  seemed 
the  shortest  and  simplest  way  of  advancing  to  the  truth  confessed. 
The  decisions  of  the  Councils  as  embraced  in  this  Creed  exhibit  the 
following  important  points  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity : 

1.  The  unity  of  the  Divine  Essence.  "  We  believe  in  one  God." 
This  opposed  everything  like  tri-theism,  and  was  necessary  to  guard 
against  anj'  tendency  to  worship  inferior  deities.  It  is  a  sufficient 
answer  to  cavilling  objectors,  ancient  and  modern,  of  worshipping 
more  than  one  God.  Not  even  the  monarchians  were  more  decided 
in  their  opposition  to  any  and  every  view  that  arrayed  itself  against 
this  fundamental  truth. 

2.  The  trinity  of  persons  in  the  Godhead.  The  terms  trinity  and 
perso7i  were  not  indeed  introduced  into  the  Creed,  but  the  ideas  cor- 
responding with  these  terms  are  there.  Belief  is  confessed  in  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost;  in  each  separately,  as  a  distinct  subsistence, 
and  the  triune  God  declared  worthy  to  be  "worshipped  and  glori- 
fied." The  trinity  in  unity,  and  the  unity  in  trinity,  is  clearly  con- 
tained in  the  Symbol;  and  according  to  Athanasius,  "the  Catholic 
Church  doth  neither  believe  less  than  this  homoousian  Trinity,  lest 
it  should  comply  with  Judaism,  or  sink  into  SabelHanism:  nor  yet 
more  than  this,  lest  on  the  other  hand,  it  should  tumble  down  into 
Arianism,  which  is  the  same  with  Pagan  Polytheism  and  idolatry.* 

3.  The  identity  i?i  essence  of  the  Son  with  the  Father.  'O/uoobatov^  of 
the  same  essence  or  consubstantial  with  the  Father — God  of  God, 
Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God.  The  Father  and  the  Son, 
though  differing  in  person,  so  that  they  are  not  the  same  in  this 
respect,  yet  are  of  one  and  the  same  essence. 

4.  The  eternal  generation  of  the  Son.  This  is  not  stated  in  this 
form  and  in  so  many  words,  yet  clearly  enough  taught.     The  Son 

at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father;  and  will  come  again  with  glory  to  judge  the 
living  and  the  dead.     Of  whose  kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end. 

And  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord,  the  Giver  of  life,  who  proceeds  from  the 
Father  (and  the  Son),  who  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  worshipped  and 
glorified,  who  spoke  by  the  prophets. 

"  And  in  one  holy,  catholic,  Apostolic  Church. 

"  We  confess  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins.  We  look  for  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come.    Amen." 

*  Quoted  in  Cudworth. 


I  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

is  ''begotten,  not  made" — "begotten  before  all  worlds;"  and  in  the 
old  Nicene  form,  those  are  condemned,  who  say  "there  was,  when 
he  was  not,"  or  "before  he  was  begotten  he  was  not." 

5.  TJie  divinity  ani  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  proceeds 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  "  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  is 
worshipped  and  glorified."  * 

6.  The  triune  God,  as  "  the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  things  visible 
and  invisible."  This  truth  is  not  so  distinctly  set  forth  here,  as  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  yet  understood  to  be  taught.  There  was  a 
progressive  development  in  the  form  of  this  doctrine.  The  Apostles' 
Creed  says:  "I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of 
heaven  and  earth,"  ascribing  creation  to  him  alone,  though  not  de- 
signing to  exclude  from  all  participation  the  Son  and  the  Spirit.  The 
Nicene,  in  addition,  has  in  reference  to  the  Son,  "by  whom  all  things 
were  made  that  are  in  heaven  and  in  earth."  The  Constantinopolitan 
still  adds,  in  regard  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  "the  Lord  and  Giver  of  life;" 
thus  uniting  the  three  persons  in  the  work  of  creating  and  govern- 
ing the  world. 

To  this  last  point  the  Augsburg  Confession  has  given  a  more 
complete  and  decisive  expression.  It  presents,  in  the  clearest  man- 
ner possible,  the  triune  God  as  Creator  and  Preserver,  and  thus 
stands  in  most  direct  opposition  to  Atheism,  Pantheism,  Deism, 
Naturalism,  and  every  varying  form  of  infidelity  that  would  under- 
mine and  destroy  faith  in  the  Triune  God  as  the  Maker  and  Ruler 
of  the  universe.  It  is  not  merely  a  Supreme  Being,  a  great  First 
Cause,  such  as  many  semi-infidels  are  ready  to  acknowledge,  and 
popular  writers  on  physical  science  use  to  grace  their  pages  :  nor 
yet  a  personal  God,  existing  along  with  the  universe,  yet  indifferent 
to  its  affairs;  but  God,  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  that  is  here 
confessed,  who  has  made,  and  now  preserves  and  governs  all  things. 
The  entire  universe  of  mind  and  matter,  of  beings  of  every  order 
and  rank,  and  of  whatsoever  nature,  all  come  forth  from  His  creative 
hand,  and  are  all  cared  for  and  governed  by  the  same  august  and 
gracious  Being.  Nature,  and  Providence,  and  grace,  do  not  belong 
to  entirely  different  administrations,  but  are  parts  of  one  grand  sys- 
tem, extending  through  all  time,  and  embracing  creation,  providence, 
and  redemption,  and  all  under  the  same  Triune  God,  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  "  the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  things  visible  and 
invisible." 


THE    TRINITY,  I  7 

Analysis  of  Article  I  of  the  Augsburg  Coxfessio?;. 
The  first  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  avowedly  based  on 
the  Nicene  Creed,  though  not  retaining  the  very  words  of  that  an- 
cient Symbol,  under  a  very  general  analysis  exhibits  the  following 
results:  i.  The  unity  of  the  divine  essence  ;  2.  The  trinity  of  persons 
in  the  Godhead,  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost;  3.  The  divinity  of 
each,  co-equal  and  co-eternal;  4.  The  Triune  God,  the  Creator  and 
Preserver  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible;  5.  The  term  person  em- 
ployed according  to  the  usage  of  the  Fathers;  6.  Opposing  heresies 
condemned. 

Person, 

The  term  person  is  carefully  guarded  against  misapprehension  and 
abuse.  It  "  is  not  intended  to  express  a  part  or  quality  of  another, 
but  that  which  subsists  of  itself,  precisely  as  the  Fathers  have  em- 
plo}'ed  this  term  on  this  subject." 

This  word  the  Fathers  had  made  use  of  to  express  the  different 
subsistences,  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  in  the  one  essence,  a 
trinity  of  personae  in  the  Godhead ;  and  the  authors  of  the  Confession, 
without  attempting  any  precise  definition,  or  extended  explanation, 
appropriated  the  term.  They  had  the  less  occasion  to  attempt  any 
further  elucidation  of  the  term,  since  its  use  had  been  current  in  the 
Church  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  and  in  a  sense  which,  if  not 
perfectly  comprehensible,  was  yet  free  from  any  serious  liability  to 
misapprehension,  and  served  to  guard  the  true  faith  from  the  insid- 
ious attempts  of  false  teachers.  We  really  know  as  little  of  the  es- 
sence, as  we  do  of  the  persons  of  the  Godhead,  and  must  satisfy 
ourselves  with  the  use  of  such  terms  as  will  best  express  our  imper- 
fect knowledge  and  limited  conceptions  of  this  great  mystery,  and 
at  the  same  time  afford  security  against  the  encroachments  of  error. 

Among  the  early  Fathers,  Greek  and  Latin,  there  was  much  diffi- 
culty in  settling  the  precise  meaning  and  use  of  terms  in  regard  to 
the  Trinity;  and  even  to  the  present  day  the  difficulty  is  felt  and 
acknowledged.  For  a  time  the  Greek  Fathers  used  viroaTaair  and 
ovaia  without  any  clear  distinction,  to  denote  substance  or  essence, 
and  seem  to  have  employed  them  in  the  Nicene  Creed.  Origen 
was  the  first  to  use  i-oaraaiT  to  express  the  different  subsistences  in 
the  Godhead,  and  to  speak  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  as  three 
hypostases  {tpeI-  i-Troa-aaet;-),  but  liis  use  was  not  at  once  accepted.    As 


1 8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  word  was  commonly  used  to  signify  substance,  it  was  liable  to 
serious  misapprehension,  and  many  would  interpret  the  meaning  to 
be  three  substances  or  essences  in  the  Godhead,  which  was  utterly 
contrary  to  the  faith. 

Tertullian  was  the  first  to  use  perso)m  in  the  same  sense,  and  to 
speak  definitely  of  a  trinity  of  personcB  in  the  Godhead.  He  calls 
the  Logos  a  person,  and  defends  the  use  of  the  term,  declaring  him 
to  be  the  second,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  the  third.*  But  this  use  was 
liable  to  objection,  since  persona  commonly  signified  the  mask  worn, 
or  the  character  in  which  one  appeared,  and  so  might  be  understood 
as  favoring  a  mere  difference  in  character  or  appearance.  As  the 
Latin  Fathers  could  only  render  vToaraai-  by  substantia,  which  was 
the  same  as  essentia,  they  objected  to  that  term,  and  i^poounov  was  in- 
troduced in  its  stead. 

Gradually,  however,  these  two  words,  vnoG-aai<;-  and  persona,  the  one 
Greek  the  other  Latin,  assumed  among  theological  writers  a  more 
definite  and  technical  meaning,  and  became  the  established  words  to 
express  the  faith  of  the  Church  in  the  distinctions  existing  in  the 
Godhead.  But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  these  Fathers  did  not 
fully  appreciate  the  difficulties  in  the  use  of  such  terms,  and  the 
weakness  of  the  human  mind  to  comprehend,  or  of  human  language 
to  express,  the  mysterious  truth.  Augustin  says :  In  truth  since  the 
FatJier  is  not  the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  not  the  Father,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  ivlio  is  also  called  the  gift  of  God,  can  neither  be  the  Father  nor 
the  Son,  there  are  at  any  rate  three  ;  yet,  zuhen  it  is  asked,  What  three  ? 
straightiuay  great  poverty  zveighs  upon  human  speech  ;  yet  %ve  say, 
THREE  PERSONS,  not  bccausc  that  is  what  shoidd  be  said,  but  that  zve 
may  riot  keep  silence" 

As  this  word  was  introduced,  and  continued  to  be  employed,  to 
express  real  distinctions  in  the  Godhead,  and  in  opposition  to  those 
who  denied  these  distinctions,  it  may  be  well  to  approximate  as 
nearly  as  we  can  to  a  definite  meaning.  But  as  no  definition  given 
has  proved  entirely  satisfactory,  it  would  be  presumptuous  in  us  to 
attempt  a  new  or  positive  definition.  The  best  perhaps  that  can  be 
done,  is  to  limit  and  qualify,  as  we  are  compelled  to  do  with  other 
terms  expressive  of  the  divine  nature  and  attributes.     The  distinc- 

*  "  Qiiacunque  ergo,  substantia  Sermonis  [jov  16yov')  sit,  ittutn  dico  personam 
et  illi  nomen  vindico :  et  dum  Filiiim  agnosco,  secundum  a  patre  defendo. 
.    .    .  Tertius  est  Spiritus  a  Deo  et  Filio,"  etc. 


THE    TRINITY.  1 9 

tion  involved,  in  the  application  of  the  term  person  to  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  may  be  qualified. 

I.  NEGATIVELY. 

1 .  It  is  not  the  same  as  ivJien  applied  to  Jiuuian  beings.  We  speak 
of  Peter,  James,  and  John  as  persons,  in  a  sense  different  from  what 
we  do  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  Each  individual  person 
of  the  human  family  differs  from  each  other  in  many  particulars, 
which  is  not  true  of  the  persons  in  the  Godhead. 

2.  //  is  not  one  of  essence.  There  is  but  one  divine  essence,  and 
this  essence  is  possessed  in  full  by  each  person,  so  that  in  this  re- 
spect, there  is  a  perfect  unity  in  the  Godhead.  God  is  not  only  one 
in  opposition  to  polytheism,  but  as  a  pure,  infinite  Spirit,  he  is  one 
in  nature  or  essence. 

3.  //  is  not  one  of  attributes.  Each  person  in  the  Godhead  pos- 
sesses the  same  and  equal  attributes.  No  one  possesses  more  or 
greater  attributes  than  another.  Each  is  eternal,  omnipotent,  om- 
niscient, omnipresent  and  truly  divine. 

4.  //  is  not  merely  nominal — as  when  we  apply  different  names  or 
titles  to  the  same  person.  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  are  not 
different  names  for  the  same  subsistence  or  person. 

II.  POSITIVELY. 

1.  //  is  real.  The  Father  is  not  the  Son,  nor  is  the  Son  the  Father. 
The  Holy  Spirit  is  neither  the  Father  nor  the  Son.  There  is  such 
a  difference  that  there  can  be  no  interchange  of  these  appellations, 
and  there  must  be  something  immanent  in  the  Godhead  correspond- 
ing with  such  distinction  of  names. 

2.  It  is  such  as  to  fully  warrant  the  application  of  the  personal 
pronouns,  and  other  modes  of  address  usually  and  clearly  expressive 
of  personal  distinciions. 

3.  It  is  such  as  to  involve  different  offices  in  the  great  work  of 
salvation,  so  that  each  performs  some  office  peculiar  to  that  person, 
and  which  does  not  belong  to  any  other. 

4.  It  is  such  as  to  involve  distinct,  individual  self-consciousness, 
with  intelligent,  voluntary,  individual  action.* 

*  For  an  attempt  to  explain  and  define  more  philosophically /^rji7«rt////,  see 
Miiller's  Lehre  von  der  Siinde,  Vol.  II. 
After  all,  we  see  through  a  glass  darkly. 


20  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Now  these  attempts  to  qualify  and  define  may  not  throw  much 
h'ght  on  this  profoundly  mysterious  subject,  and  we  may  add  in  the 
words  of  Chemnitz:  "The  persons  are  really  distinguished,  never- 
theless in  a  manner  to  us  incomprehensible  and  unknown."*  These 
terms  and  distinctions  however  may  serve  a  good  purpose,  for  it  is 
a  great  matter,  as  Augustine  says  :  "  If  you  cannot  find  out  what 
God  is,  nevertheless  you  may  avoid  thinking  of  him  what  he  is 
not."  The  sense  in  which  Melanchthon  employed  the  term  may  be 
further  gathered  from  his  own  definition  :  "A  person  (as  the  Church 
uses  the  word  in  this  Article)  is  an  individual  subsistence,  intelligent 
and  incommunicable."t 

Opposing  Heresies  Condemned. 

Besides  thus  setting  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  Godhead,  according 
to  the  Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan  Creed,  the  Reformers  mentioned 
the  most  prominent  errors  to  which  it  was  opposed,  and  which  are 
condemned  by  this  Article.  This  served  to  put  the  truth  confessed 
in  a  still  clearer  light,  by  enabling  us  to  view  it  in  contrast  with  op- 
posing errors.  "Every  heresy,"  say  they,  "opposed  to  this  Article 
is  therefore  condemned,  as  that  of  the  Manichaeans,"  etc.  A  brief 
notice  of  these  heresies  seems  necessary  to  a  proper  elucidation  of 
this  Article,  and  yet  it  is  almost  impossible  to  say  anything  satisfac- 
tory, in  so  few  words,  upon  so  difficult  and  extensive  a  subject  as 
these  heresies  present. | 

I.  '' ManicJicEans,  who  assume  two  principles,  the  one  good,  the 
other  evil."  This  sect  took  its  name  from  Manes  or  Mani,  a  Persian 
philosopher  and  religionist,  who  flourished  in  the  third  century. 
Much  obscurity  however  rests  upon  the  origin  and  history  of  the 

*  Loci  Theologici,  37. 

f  Persona,  itt  ecclesia  iii  hoc  articiilo  loqidiiir,  est  substantia  individtia,  in, 
telligens  et  incomiHiinicabilis.^'     Loci  Communes. 

Elsewhere  Melancthon  has  "  Persona  est  substantia  individua,  intel/igens, 
incommunicabilis ,  non  sustentata  in  alia  natura." 

And  "  vTToaTaaig-  autem  seu  Persona  est,  sitbsistens,  vivuin,  individiium,  in- 
telligens,  incominunicabile,  non  sustentatum  in  atiis." 

More  may  be  seen  on  this  subject  in  Chemnitz,  Twesten,  and  Stuart. 

X  For  a  full  account  of  the  heresies  mentioned  in  this  Article,  and  of  which 
only  a  very  brief  notice  could  be  given  here,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Walch's 
Historie  der  Kctzcreien  ;  to  the  Histories  of  Mosheim,  Neander,  Geiseler,  and 
Schaff ;  and  Hagenbach's  History  of  Doctrine,  and  works  there  referred  to. 


THE    TRINITY.  21 

Manich?ean  doctrine.  Enough  is  known  to  understand  that  the 
whole  system  is  utterly  subversive  of  Christianity.  Manes  proposed 
to  unite  some  elements  of  Christianity  with  Oriental  philosophy  and 
theology,  and  thus  produced  a  strange  compound  of  tlie  most  het- 
erogeneous materials.  Instead  of  one  infinite,  eternal  essence,  which 
alone  is  God,  Manes  held  to  two  principles,  the  one  good,  the  other 
evil,  in  perpetual  conflict.  His  system  ignores  the  great  facts  of 
Revelation,  discarding  the  Old  Testament,  and  explaining  the  New 
to  suit  his  own  doctrines.  He  denies  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of 
God,  leaves  no  place  for  an  atonement,  and  claims  himself  to  be  the 
Paraclete  promised  by  Christ.  There  could  be  no  redemption  by 
the  blood  of  Christ,  or  regeneration  and  sanctification  by  the  Spirit. 
It  may  seem  strange  that  such  a  medley  should  gain  any  currency 
with  thinking  people,  and  yet  succeeding  Gnosticism,  to  which  it 
was  somewhat  allied,  it  spread  extensively  and  greatly  corrupted 
the  true  doctrine.  Even  so  great  a  mind  as  that  of  Augustine  was 
for  a  time  captivated  by  its  pretences  to  unite  philosophy  and  relig- 
ion and  teach  the  true  way  of  life.  But  it  could  not  permanently 
stand  before  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  and  is  now  numbered  among 
exploded  errors,  that  only  served  to  bring  out  in  brighter  splendor 
the  precious  doctrines  of  divine  revelation. 

2.  Valoititiians.  Valentinus  lived  in  the  second  century,  taught 
at  Rome,  and  died  at  Cyprus,  A.  D.  i6o.  He  belonged  to  the 
Gnostic  sect,  and  is  considered  as  having  given  the  most  complete 
and  complicated  development  of  Gnostic  ideas.  This  system,  which 
exercised  so  mighty  an  influence  on  the  doctrines,  and  occupies  so 
wide  a  space  in  the  history  of  that  period,  was  heathen  in  its  origin. 
It  was  a  most  vigorous  attempt  to  unite  pagan  philosophy  with 
Christian  ideas,  and  produce  one  grand,  harmonious  system  of 
philosophy  and  religion.  "  It  is,"  says  Schaff,  "  an  attempt  to  solve 
some  of  the  deepest  metaphysical  and  theological  problems.  It 
deals  with  the  grand  antithesis  of  God  and  world,  spirit  and  matter, 
idea  and  phenomenon ;  and  endeavors  to  unlock  the  m)-stery  of  the 
origin  of  evil,  and  the  whole  question  of  the  rise,  development,  and. 
end  of  the  world."  Claiming  a  superior  wisdom  {^vuair)  it  sought 
to  explain  away  most  of  the  simple,  historical  statements  of  the, 
Bible.  Like  Manichseism,  of  which  it  was  the  forerunner,  it  held  to. 
two  antagonistic  principles.  From  God,  as  the  primal  being  and 
source,  proceed  successive  zeons,  which  form  the  world  of  light. 
3 


2  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

To  this  matter  is  opposed,  and  presents  the  world  of  darkness.  Be- 
tween these  there  is  incessant  conflict.  Christ  himself  is  regarded 
as  one,  the  most  perfect,  of  these  aeons,  seeking  to  overcome  or  win 
the  darkness.  There  is  left  no  place  in  this  conglomerate  system 
for  the  incarnation,  death,  resurrection,  ascension,  intercession  of 
Christ.  It  is  a  vain  attempt  to  marry  a  false  philosophy  to  the  true 
religion  of  the  Bible.  Against  such  efforts  Paul  may  be  understood 
as  warning  Timothy  when  he  cautioned  him  not  to  "  give  heed  to 
fables  and  endless  genealogies,"  and  "  to  avoid  profane  and  vain 
babblings,  and  oppositions  of  science  (yvum-)  falsely  so  called." 

3.  Arians.  Of  Arius  and  his  doctrine  mention  has  already  been 
made,  and  it  seems  unnecessary  to  dwell  upon  the  subject  again. 
The  decision  of  the  Council  of  Nice  failed  to  check,  or  at  least  to 
stop,  the  spread  of  this  heresy.  Arius  was  recalled  from  banishment, 
and  restored  to  his  Church.  His  superiors  in  church  authority  re- 
fused to  recognize  him,  and  in  the  midst  of  the  contest  he  suddenly 
died.  After  his  death  his  views  spread  more  rapidly  than  before, 
and  for  a  century  there  was  a  struggle  between  the  Nicene  doctrine 
and  Arianism  for  the  supremacy,  until  at  length  the  truth  prevailed 
over  error.  Since  the  Reformation,  Arianism  appeared  in  England 
and  on  the  Continent,  but  it  has  failed,  as  a  system,  to  maintain  a 
distinct  place  among  other  doctrines,  and  has  gradually  terminated 
in  Socinianism  and  Unitarianism.  It  can  hardly  be  said  to  have 
any  existence  at  the  present  day,  and  its  history  teaches  us  that  there 
is  no  medium  between  "honoring  the  Son  as  we  honor  the  Father," 
and  "  denying  the  only  Lord  God,  and  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

4.  Ennoviiaiis.  Eunomius,  from  whom  the  name  is  derived,  was 
a  native  of  Cappadocia,  and  was  somewhat  conspicuous  as  a  teacher 
of  false  doctrine  during  the  fourth  century.  Trained  under  Arian 
teachers,  he  improved  on  their  doctrines,  and  carried  to  the  extreme 
this  false  system.  Whilst  Arius,  and  those  agreeing  with  him,  ad- 
mitted that  the  Son  was  of  like  nature  with  the  Father,  Eunomius 
maintained  that  he  was  of  a  nature  not  only  different,  but  dissimi- 
lar, and  saw  in  him  nothing  but  a  created  being.  Of  the  Holy 
Ghost  he  taught  still  lower  views.  Maintaining  the  comprehensi- 
bility  of  God,  and  ridiculing  the  belief  of  what  we  cannot  under- 
stand, he  wholly  rejected  the  divinity  of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  and 
would  not  tolerate  a  trinity  of  persons  in  the  unity  of  the  divine 
essence.     Exalting  as  supreme  the  logical  understanding,  he  may  be 


THE    TRINITY.  23 

regarded  as  belonging  to  that  class,  who,  claiming  for  themselves  a 
monopoly  of  intelligence  and  reason,  are  called  rationalists.  He 
might  find  his  appropriate  place  among  the  so-called  "  free-thinkers," 
or  "  liberal  Christians,"  who  pay  more  homage  to  their  own  reason- 
ings than  to  the  wisdom  of  God ;  and  we  may  learn  that  modern 
rationalism  is  only  repeating  itself,  and  has  nothing  new  or  great  of 
which  to  boast. 

5.  Mahometans.  The  followers  of  the  false  prophet.  This  sys- 
tem, of  later  origin,  and  continuing  to  the  present  day,  is  too  well 
known  to  call  for  any  extended  notice.  It  is  indeed  the  only  one  of 
the  heresies  mentioned  in  this  Article,  that  can  be  truly  said  to  con- 
tinue its  existence  by  name.  The  followers  of  Mahomet  are  still 
numbered  by  millions,  and  are  among  the  most  decided  and  invete- 
rate enemies  of  the  Christian  faith.  The  one  grand  truth  of  this 
system  is  that  there  is  but  one  true  God,  and  Mahomet  his  pro- 
phet. Not  in  the  orthodox,  but  in  the  Unitarian  sense,  they  hold  to 
the  unity  of  God,  and  utterly  deny  the  divinity  of  the  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Of  course  it  knows  nothing  of  the  incarnation,  the 
atonement,  redemption  in  tlie  blood  of  the  Lamb,  or  eternal  life  as 
the  purchase  of  a  Saviour's  death.  Its  faith  is  Unitarian,  its  wor- 
ship a  slavish  fear,  and  its  influence  deadening  to  all  the  finer  sensi- 
bilities and  to  all  man's  sublimest  hopes.  It  is  enough  to  say  that 
for  lost  man  it  has  no  Saviour. 

6.  Samosatenians,  ancient  and  modern.  The  name  derived  from 
Paul  of  Samoseta,  whose  followers  took  the  name  in  history  of 
Samosatenians.  All  unite  in  representing  him  as  worldly,  ambiti- 
ous, insolent  and  vain.  He  became  bishop  of  Antioch,  A.  D.  260, 
and  united  with  his  care  of  the  Church,  a  civil  office.  He  was 
charged  with  heresy,  and  several  Councils  were  called  on  his  ac- 
count. At  length  he  was  condemned  and  deposed,  but  his  party 
continued  to  exist,  under  different  names,  until  the  fourth  century, 
and  the  Reformers  .speak  of  modern  Samosatenians.  These  latter 
are  supposed  to  refer  to  Servetus  and  others,  who  were  reviving 
and  teaching  the  same  doctrines.  They  deny  the  divinity  and  per- 
sonality of  the  Z^^^jT  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  regard  Christ  as  a  mere 
human  being,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  as  only  a  divine  influence  or 
agency.  Their  condemnation,  though  it  did  not  destroy  the  doc- 
trine, yet  aided  in  maintaining  the  true  faith.  Modern  Unitarian- 
ism  may  be  regarded  as  the  genuine  succession  to  Samosatenianism. 


24  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

With  individual  peculiarities,  all  these  different  sects  and  heresies 
agree  in  maintaining  false  views  of  the  Godhead,  and  especially  of 
the  true  divinity  of  the  Son,  the  proper  personality  and  divinity  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  union  of  the  three  divine  persons  in  the 
one  ineffable  essence.  All  had  been  condemned  by  the  Church,  as 
contrary  to  sound  doctrine,  and  now  the  Reformers  unite,  with  true 
believers  of  every  age,  in  confessing  the  faith  once  delivered,  and 
amid  many  conflicts  still  maintained,  by  the  saints. 

II. 

Having  now  presented  the  doctrine  as  contained  in  this  ancient 
Creed,  and  confessed  by  the  Reformers  in  the  first  Article  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  we  proceed  to  inquire  whether  that  doctrine 
is  in  harmony  with  "the  only  rule  and  standard,  according  to  which 
all  doctrines  and  teachers  alike  ought  to  be  tried  and  judged."  Is 
the  doctrine  confessed  the  doctrine  of  the  Word  of  God?  Are  these 
two  in  such  complete  and  perfect  harmony  that  we  may  accept  the 
one  as  confessing  the  faith  in  the  other?  We  will  endeavor  to  con- 
duct the  examination  of  this  question  in  as  simple  a  form,  and  as 
briefly  as  possible,  necessarily  confining  ourselves  to  the  most  im- 
portant proofs. 

Unity. 

I.  In  the  Word  of  God  we  have  clearly  and  emphatically  taught 
the  iinity  of  the  Godhead.  This  is  so  fundamental  that  we  dare  not 
allow  any  other  view  of  God  to  contradict,  or  come  in  conflict  with 
it.  The  Bible  is  irreconcilably  opposed  to  every  form  of  polytheism, 
and  inculcates  the  worship  of  the  one  true  and  living  God.  Its 
decisive  language  is:  "Hear,  O  Israel;  the  Lord  our  God  is  one 
Lord,"  Deut.  vi.  4;  and,  "Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  before 
me,"  Ex.  XX.  3.  "I  am  the  Lord,  and  there  is  none  else,  there  is 
no  God  beside  me  *  *  a  just  God  and  a  Saviour,"  Is.  xlv.  5,21. 
"  But  to  us  there  is  but  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all  things, 
and  we  in  Him;  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are  all  things, 
and  we  by  Him,"  i  Cor.  viii.  6,  "  One  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is 
above  all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all,"  Eph.  iv.  6.  It  is  need- 
less, but  would  be  easy,  to  multiply  quotations  of  a  similar  charac- 
ter, both  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  God  has  revealed 
himself  to  us  as  One,  a  pure  Spirit,  infinite,  eternal,  omnipresent, 


THE    TRINITY.  25 

unchangeable,  and  by  the  very  nature  of  his  being  excluding  all 
other  gods.  As  such  he  fills  heaven  and  earth,  "whom  no  man 
hath  seen,  nor  can  see,"  "  the  King  eternal,  immortal,  invisible,  the 
only  wise  God,"  i  Tim.  i.  17, 

Trinity. 

2.  Equally  decisive  is  the  same  authority  as  to  the  distinction  in 
the  Godhead,  and  the  existence  of  a  trinity  of  persons,  as  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  In  the  Old  Testament  this  doctrine  is  not 
so  clearly  revealed,  yet  there  are  announcements  that  involve  the 
truth,  and  more  than  glimpses  of  what  was  to  be  fully  developed, 
when  the  Only-begotten  should  come  forth  from  the  bosom  of  the 
Father.  In  this  respect  there  is  a  perfect  agreement  between  the 
gradual  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  that  of  the 
great  doctrines  of  divine  revelation.  "  Life  and  immortality," 
shadowed  forth  under  the  old  dispensation,"  are  brought  to  light  in 
the  gospel."  In  the  Old  Testament,  the  Son  and  Spirit,  as  well  as 
the  Father,  are  spoken  of,  Ps.  ii.  Is.  xlviii.  16,  and  forms  of  speech 
employed,  pointing  to  the  grand  mystery  of  Trinity  in  Unity,  Ps. 
xxxiii.  6,  Num.  vi.  23-26,  Is.  vi.  3.  But  in  the  New  Testament  we 
have  clearer  liglit  upon  this,  as  upon  other  doctrines.  The  very 
annunciation  of  the  birth  of  Jesus,  was  that  it  should  be  through  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  that  he  should  "  be  called  the  Son  of  the  Highest," 
Luke  i.  The  mysterious  child  is  "  Immanuel,  the  Mighty  God, 
whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of  old,  from  everlasting."  When 
he  was  baptized,  the  Spirit  of  God,  in  a  bodily  form,  descended  upon 
him,  and  there  was  a  voice  from  heaven  saying,  "This  is  my  beloved 
Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased."  Here  is  a  distinct  revelation  of 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  In  those  most  wonderful  discourses 
delivered  to  his  disciples  shortly  before  his  death,  and  so  full}-  pre- 
served by  John,  we  have  a  most  ample  statement  of  the  distinction, 
and  the  relations  existing,  between  the  persons  of  the  Sacred  Trinity. 
The  Father  has  sent  forth  the  Son  into  the  world,  The  Son  had 
left  the  glory  he  had  with  the  Father  before  the  world  was,  and 
come  to  earth  to  suffer  and  die.  He  is  about  to  return  again  to  the 
Father,  having  accomplished  his  mission.  But  another  will  be  sent, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Comforter,  who  will  abide  with  the  disciples. 
Coming  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  he  will  guide  them  into  all 
truth,  John  xiv,  15-26,  xv.  26,  xvi,  13,  15.     When  Christ  commis- 


26  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

sioned  his  apostles  to  disciple  the  nations,  it  was  by  preaching,  and 
baptizing  them  "  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,"  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  The  apostolic  benediction  is  in 
the  name  of  the  triune  God,  2  Cor.  xiii.  14.  Any  attempt  to  explain 
these  words  of  baptism  and  benediction,  in  any  other  way  than  that 
of  admitting  a  trinity  of  persons,  alike  divine,  must  appear  unnatural 
and  absurd.  The  inspired  apostles  very  repeatedly  witness  the  same 
truth.  Paul  says,  "  For  through  him  (Christ)  we  both  have  access 
by  one  Spirit,  unto  the  Fathe?-"  Eph.  ii.  18.  Again,  speaking  of  the 
great  salvation,  "  which  at  the  first  began  to  be  spoken  by  the  Lord 
(Jesus  Christ),  and  was  confirmed  unto  us  by  them  that  heard  him, 
God  (the  Father)  also  bearing  them  witness,  both  with  signs  and 
wonders,  and  divers  miracles  and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Heb.  ii. 
3,  4.  Peter  says,  "  Elect  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father,  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  unto  obedience  and 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Resits  Christ,''  i  Pet.  i.  2.  Language 
could  not  be  plainer,  and  nothing  but  the  supposed  difficulty  of 
admitting  a  trinity  of  persons  in  the  Godhead  could  ever  have  started 
a  doubt,  or  suggested  any  other  interpretation  as  possible.  If  will- 
ing to  receive  the  clear  and  manifold  testimony  of  God's  Word,  we 
cannot  doubt  that  in  the  unity  of  essence  in  the  Godhead  there  is  a 
trinity  of  persons. 

Divinity. 

3.  In  like  manner  may  it  be  shown  that  to  each  of  the  three  is 
ascribed  absolute  divinity.  "  The  Father  is  God,  the  Son  is  God, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  is  God.  And  yet  there  are  not  three  Gods,  but 
one  God."*  The  proof  on  this  point  would  be  most  complete  and 
satisfactory  by  taking  each  person  separately,  but  for  the  sake  of 
brevity,  and  as  amply  sufficient,  we  will  take  the  whole  together. 

(i)  To  each  of  the  three  persons  the  names  or  titles  of  divinity 
are  applied,  a.  The  Father,  Deut.  xxxii.  6;  i  Chron.  xxix.  10:  Is. 
Ixiv.  8,  Ixiii.  16 ;  Mai.  i.  6,  ii.  10  ;  Rom.  xv.  6 ;  i  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  2  Cor. 
xi.  31  ;  Gal.  i.  3,  4;  Eph.  i.  i  ;  Phil.  i.  i  ;  Col.  i.  2 ;  i  Thess.  i.  i ; 
2  Thess.  i.  i,  2  ;  2  John  3. 

b.  The  Son.  The  most  exalted  name  Jehovah.  Jer.  xxiii.  6  ; 
Is.  Ixi.  I,  8,  10;  xi.  1-3,  with  John  xii.  41.  In  the  New  Testament 
God  and  Lord.     John  i.  i,  xx.  28  ;  Acts  xx.  28  ;  Rom.  ix.  5  ;  i  Tim. 

*  Athanasian  Confession. 


THE    TRINITY.  27 

iii.  16 ;  Tit.  ii.  13  ;  i  John  v.  20 ;  Heb.  i.  8  ;  Rev.  xix.  17 ;  i  Cor.  xv. 
47  ;  Acts  X.  36 ;  Rev.  xvii.  14,  xix.  16. 

r.  The  Holy  Ghost.  Ex.  xvii.  7,  and  Ps.  xcv.  7,  8,  with  Heb.  iii. 
7-1 1  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  2  ;  Acts  v.  3,  4 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  17. 

(2)  To  each  divine  attributes  are  ascribed.  Eternity,  a.  The 
Father.  Deut.  xxxiii.  27  ;  Ps.  xc.  2,  xciii.  2  ;  Is.  Ivii.  15  ;  Hab.  i.  12  ; 
I  Tim.  i.  17.  b.  The  Son.  Ps.  xlv.  6  ;  Is.  ix.  6  ;  Mic.  v.  2  ;  John  i.  i, 
viii.  58,  xvii.  5  ;  Col.  i.  17  ;  Heb.  xiii.  8;  Rev.  i.  17.  c.  The  Holy 
Ghost.     Heb.  ix.  14. 

Omnipresence,  a.  The  Father,  i  Kings  viii.  27  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  23, 
24;  Eph.  i.  23.  b.  The  Son.  Matt,  xviii.  20,  xxviii.  20;  John  i.  18. 
c.  The  Holy  Ghost.     Ps.  cxxxix.  7;  i  Cor.  xii.  10-13. 

Omniscience,  a.  The  Father.  Ps.  cxlvii.  5  ;  Is.  xl.  28.  xlvi.  9  ; 
Acts  XV.  18;  Heb.  iv.  13.  b.  The  Son.  John  xi.  25.  xxi.  17;  Rev. 
ii.  23  ;  Acts  i.  24.  c.  The  Holy  Ghost,  i  Cor.  ii.  10,  1 1  ;  John  xiv. 
26,  xvi.  13. 

Omnipotence,  a.  The  Father.  Gen.  xvii.  i  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  17 ; 
Matt.  xix.  26  ;  Rev.  xi.  17,  xix.  6.  b.  The  Son.  Heb.  i.  3  ;  Is.  ix.  6  ; 
Matt,  xxviii.  18  ;  Rev.  i.  8.  c.  The  Holy  Ghost.  Luke  i.  35  ;  Rom. 
xv.  19  ;  Heb.  ii.  4. 

(3)  To  each  divine  works  are  attributed.  Creation,  a.  The 
Father.     Gen.  i.  i  ;  Neh.  ix.  6;  Is.  xlii.  5  ;  Heb.  iii.  4;   Rev.  i\^    11. 

b.  The  Son.     John  i.  3,  10  ;  Col.  i.  16,  17  ;  Eph.  iii.  9  ;  Heb.  i.   2,  10. 

c.  The  Holy  Ghost.     Gen.  i.  2  ;  Job  xxvi.  13  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  civ.  30. 
Preservation  and  Providence,     a.  The  Father.     Nch.  ix.  6 ;  Job 

xii.  10;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6;  Acts  xvii.  26-28;  Ps.  civ.  14,  15,  21,27,  28; 
Matt.  V.  45,  vi.  26-30.  b.  The  Son.  Heb.  i.  3  ;  Col.  i.  17  ;  Matt, 
xxviii.  18  ;  Is.  ix.  7  ;  I  Thess.  iii.  2  ;  I  Cor.  xv.  25  ;  Rev.  xi.  15.  c. 
The  Holy  Ghost.      Ps.  civ.  30. 

Redemption  and  Salvation,  a.  The  Father.  John  iii.  16;  i  John 
iv.  9;  Is.  Ixiii.  16,  xlv.  21.  b.  The  Son.  Matt.  i.  21  ;  Rom.  iii.  24; 
Eph.  i.  7  ;  Heb.  ix.  12  ;  Acts  iv.  12  ;  Heb.  ii.  10;  John  iv.  42  ;  i  John 
iv.  14.  c.  The  Holy  Ghost.  Heb.  ix.  14;  Tit.  iii.  5;  2  Thess.  ii. 
1 3  ;  Rom.  v.  5  ;  I  Pet.  i.  2. 

(4)  To  each  divine  honors  and  worship  are  ascribed,  a.  The 
Father.  Deut.  x.xxii.  6;  Is.  Ixiv.  8  ;  Matt.  vi.  9;  Rom.  viii.  15,  16. 
b.  The  Son.  John  v.  22,  23  ;  Acts  vii.  59,  60  ;  i  Cor.  i.  2  ;  Phil.  ii. 
9,  10;  Heb.  i.  6;  I  Pet.  iii.  22;  Rev.  i.  5,  6,  v.  1 1,  12,  vii.  10.  c.  The 
Holy  Ghost.     Matt,  xxviii.  19;  2  Cor.  xiii.  14  ;  Rev.  i.  4,  5. 


28  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

These  passages,  which  might  be  greatly  multiplied,  prove  that 
the  Word  of  God  reveals  to  us  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  as 
divine,  possessing  the  names,  attributes,  works  and  worship,  which 
belong  to  God  alone. 

Personality. 

4.  That  each  possesses  a  distinct  subsistence,  which  we  designate 
by  the  term  person,  may  also  be  shown.  We  will  not  here  attempt 
any  further  explanation  of  the  term  itself,  but  offer  some  of  the  proof 
for  the  existence  of  that  which  is  expressed  by  the  word  persons. 

(i)  The  names.  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  are  used  together 
in  such  a  way  that  no  one  could  be  exchanged  for  the  other,  or 
understood  in  any  other  way  than  as  distinct  subsistences  or  persons. 
And  this  not  once  or  twice,  but  again  and  again.  No  rule  or  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation  will  allow  us  to  understand  these  names,  when 
thus  used,  in  any  other  sense  than  that  of  belonging  to  persons  or 
subsistences  differing  the  one  from  the  other.  Each  possesses  the 
attributes  most  distinctive  of  personality,  as  intelligence,  self-con- 
sciousness, volition  and  voluntary  action.  Matt,  xxviii.  20  ;  2  Cor. 
xiii.  14;  Eph.  ii.  18.;  i  Pet.  i.  2. 

(2)  The  personal  pronouns,  I,  thou,  he,  are  used  by  Christ  when 
speaking  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  such  a  way  as 
must  involve  personal  distinctions.  In  John  (chaps,  xiv.-xvii.)  we 
find  him  repeatedly  addressing  the  Father  in  the  second  person, 
"thou,  thine,  thee;"  and  also  speaking  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the 
third  person,  "  he,"  as  distinct  both  from  the  Father  and  himself 
"Thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee."  "  I  have  glorified  thee  on 
the  earth,  and  now,  O  Father,  glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self, 
with  the  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was."  "  The 
Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my  name,  he  shall  glorify 
me,  for  he  shall  receive  of  mine,  and  shall  show  it  unto  you." 
Words  could  not  be  plainer,  and  whatever  difficulty  we  may  have 
in  fathoming  the  depth  of  mysterious  meaning,  we  dare  not  set  aside 
the  simple  truth,  or  refuse  to  believe  because  we  cannot  fully  com- 
prehend. 

(3)  Each  performs  offices  distinctive  of  personality.  The  Father, 
moved  by  compassionate  love,  sends  his  Son  into  the  world.  He 
commended  his  love  by  this  wonderful  gift.  The  Son  came  forth, 
from  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was 


THE    TRINITY.  29 

lost.  After  dying  on  the  cross,  and  rising  from  the  dead,  he  re- 
turned to  the  Father  to  present  his  own  infinite  sacrifice,  and  to 
intercede  for  the  guilty.  Because  he  lives  to  make  intercession 
with  the  Father,  sinners  can  come  to  the  throne  of  grace  with 
boldness  in  his  name.  The  Holy  Spirit  comes  to  take  and  apply 
the  redemption  purchased  by  the  Son  through  his  sufferings  and 
death.  "  He  shall  receive  of  mine,"  said  the  Saviour,  "and  shall 
show  it  unto  you."  "  He  shall  glorify  me."  While  the  Spirit  en- 
lightens and  renews,  the  Son  intercedes  with  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  receives  those  who  come  unto  him  through  the  Son.  John 
iii.  16;  Rom.  v.  8;  Luke  xix.  10;  Rom.  iv.  25  ;  John  xvi.  14,  15; 
Heb.  vii.  25  ;  Rev.  xxii.  17. 

(4)  Of  each  are  many  additional  things  predicated,  showing  dis- 
tinction and  personality.  We  can  only  mention  a  very  few.  The 
Son  [Logos]  was  in  the  beginning  with  God  (a  difference  of  person), 
and  was  God  (unity  of  essence).  He  says,  "  I  came  forth  from  the 
Father,  and  am  come  into  the  world  ;  again  I  leave  the  world,  and 
go  to  the  Father,"  John  xvi.  28.  To  the  Father  the  Son  declares : 
"  Thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,"  John  xvii. 
24.  The  Father  "hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son," 
John  V.  22.  Against  the  Holy  Ghost  there  is  a  blasphemy,  dis- 
tinguishing it  from  other  sins  against  the  Father  and  the  Son.  and 
distinguishing  him  from  the  other  persons  of  the  Trinity,  Matt- 
xii.  31.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  grieved,  which  can  only  be  true  of  a 
Being  possessed  of  personality. 

Indeed,  the  evidence  is  so  abundant,  so  varied,  and  so  complete, 
that  the  only  difficulty,  in  a  brief  presentation,  is  to  select  and 
arrange.  To  exhibit  all  the  testimony  of  the  Bible  on  this  subject 
would  be  to  present  no  small  part  of  the  New  Testament,  for  it 
abounds  with  the  proof  of  the  unity  and  trinit}^  of  the  Godhead, 
and  of  the  supreme  divinity  and  distinct  personality  of  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost.  Beyond  all  controversy  there  is  fully  grounded 
in  the  divine  Word  the  .doctrine  of  the  Church,  as  contained  in  the 
statement  of  the  Athanasian  Symbol:  "This  is  the  Catholic  faith: 
That  tve  zvorsJiip  one  God  in  Trinity,  and  Trinity  in  Unity,  neither 
confounding  the  persons  nor  dividing  the  essence." 


30  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Apostolic  Fathers. 

The  testimony  of  the  Word  of  God  will  satisfy  those  who  receive 
its  authority  as  infallible.  As  a  matter  of  pure  revelation,  this  is 
sufficient,  and  should  make  "an  end  of  all  strife,"  except  with  such 
as  will  not  submit  their  reason  to  the  wisdom  of  God.  But  it  may 
help  to  confirm  our  interpretation  of  that  Word,  as  well  as  to  assure 
us  of  a  common  faith  with  the  apostolic  Church,  to  adduce  also  the 
testimony  of  the  immediate  successors  of  the  inspired  apostles. 
They  would  not  be  likely  to  err  on  so  vital  a  subject  as  this,  and 
would  know  from  personal  intercourse  with  the  apostles  the  truths 
they  inculcated. 

The  scholastic  definitions  and  theological  terms  of  a  later  age 
were  not  in  use  at  this  time,  but  that  they  acknowledged  and  wor- 
shipped the  triune  God,  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  is  beyond 
all  controversy  or  doubt.  And  that  whilst  they  believed  in  the  one 
true  and  living  God,  they  also  believed  in  a  distinction  between  the 
Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  is  equally  clear.  To  each  they 
ascribed  true  and  proper  divinity,  without  any  attempt  to  define  or 
explain. 

Very  frequently  is  Christ  spoken  of  as  ''God','  and  as  "  our  God," 
and  that  he  was  worshipped  as  God,  we  have  the  well-known  testi- 
mony even  of  Pliny,  in  addition  to  their  own  writings.  We  will 
limit  ourselves  to  a  {^xn  passages  bearing  more  directly  upon  the 
Trinity. 

1.  Clement,  of  whom  Paul  makes  mention  (Phil.  iv.  3),  asks: 
"Have  we  not  one  God,  and  one  Christ?  Is  there  not  one  Spirit 
of  grace,  who  is  poured  out  upon  us,  and  one  calling  in  Christ?" 
Ep.  i.  46. 

2.  Polycarp,  the  disciple  and  companion  of  John,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  the  epistle  of  the  church  of  Smyrna,  besides  recogniz- 
ing Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  in  his  prayer  at  the  stake,  closed 
with  the  glowing  words;  "For  this,  and  for  all  things,  I  praise 
thee,  I  bless  thee,  I  glorify  thee,  together  with  the  eternal  and 
heavenly  Jesus  Christ,  thy  beloved  Son  ;  with  whom,  to  thee  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  be  glory,  both  now  and  to  all  succeeding  ages. 
Amen."  Ep.  xiv.  The  same  distinct  rendering  of  divine  homage 
to  the  triune  God  follows  at  the  close  of  this  epistle. 

3.  Ignatius,  also  the  disciple  of  John  and  friend  of  Polycarp,  in 


THE    TRINITY. 


31 


his  epistle  to  the  Magnesians,  says,  "Study  that  whatsoever  ye  do 
*  *  ye  may  prosper  both  in  body  and  in  spirit,  in  faith  and 
charity,  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost," 
Ep.  xiii.  The  account  of  his  martyrdom,  professedly  by  eye-wit- 
nesses, closes  with  :  "  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,  through  whom,  and 
with  whom,  be  glory  and  power  to  the  Father,  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  forever.     Amen."* 

It  would  be  easy  to  produce  like  testimonies  from  others  imme- 
diately following,  but  we  deem  these  sufficient  for  our  purpose. 
They  show  how  holy  men  of  God,  who  conversed  and  lived  with 
the  apostles  of  the  blessed  Saviour,  understood  this  momentous 
subject,  and  prove  the  truth  of  Tertullian's  declaration,  that  this 
had  been  the  faith  from  the  beginning.  It  is  barely  conceivable, 
but  by  no  means  credible,  that  men  like  Polycarp,  who  told  of  his 
intercourse  with  John  and  with  the  rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord,  and 
what  he  had  heard  from  them,  respecting  the  Lord,  His  miracles 
and  his  doctrine,  could  have  been  mistaken ;  and  that  they  recog- 
nized and  worshipped  the  triune  God  is  beyond  a  doubt. 

Alleged  Objections  to  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

Objections  have  been  repeated  from  age  to  age  against  this  doc- 
trine of  the  Christian  faith.  It  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the 
cause  of  truth,  and  to  the  stability  of  our  faith,  to  note  whence  these 
objections  arise,  and  what  is  the  precise  point  against  which  their 
force  lies.  And  we  think  we  are  not  mistaken  in  saying,  that  these 
objections  have  their  origin  in  the  difficulties  which  meet  us  in  our 
attempts  to  comprehend  this  mysterious  subject,  and  to  effect  an 
adjustment  between  the  different  statements  of  the  Bible  and  our 
own  reasonings  upon  them.  The  force  of  these  objections  is  not  so 
much  against  the  evidence  for  each  separate  part  of  the  doctrine,  as 
against  the  doctrine  as  a  whole,  or  that  adjustment  of  the  separate 
parts  into  one  rounded  .system,  which  has  received  the  endorsement 
of  the  Church.  We  believe  there  never  would  have  been  a  single 
objection  raised  against  this  doctrine,  had  it  not  been  supposed  to 
conflict  with  other  doctrines,  and  to  be  at  war  with  human  reason. 
It  was  not  the  insufficient  evidence  of  any  particular  part,  that 
started  men  to  doubt  and  object,  but  the  difficulty  of  receiving  evi- 

Hefele's  Apostolic  Fathers,  120,  280,  186. 


32  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

dence  to  prove  what  was  imagined  to  be  unreasonable  or  impossible; 
and  hence  the  effort  to  get  rid  of  the  evidence  by  explaining  it 
away,  or  denying  its  force.  It  will  hardly  be  pretended  by  any  one 
that  Christ  is  not  called  God  in  the  Scriptures,  or  that  there  is  lack- 
ing any  proof  that  could  be  presented  to  establish  the  doctrine  of 
His  proper  and  supreme  divinity.  The  same  thing  may  be  said  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Each  person  in  the  Godhead  has  every  title, 
attribute,  work,  and  honor  that  belongs  to  God,  and  this  cannot  be 
denied.  But  reason  is  at  once  staggered  to  know  how  these  three 
can  be  one  God,  or  how  we  can  reconcile  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
with  the  universally  recognized  truth  among  believers  in  a  divine 
revelation,  the  unity  of  the  Godhead. 

Now  to  those  who  receive  the  testimony  of  God's  Word  as  suf- 
ficient and  infallible,  it  must  be  a  very  great  relief  to  know  that  the 
difficulty  is  not  with  any  deficiency  or  want  of  clearness  in  the  evi- 
dence, but  in  our  endeavoring  to  adjust  the  different  parts  so  as  to 
constitute  an  intelligent  and  consistent  whole.  The  one  part  is 
clear  enough,  the  evidence  not  only  sufficient,  but  accumulated  and 
overpowering.     The  other  may  be  very  dark  and  mysterious. 

Now  the  true  province  of  reason  in  such  a  case  is  to  examine 
and  weigh  the  testimony,  to  determine  its  sufficiency  and  what  it 
does  prove.  It  is  not  bound  to  reconcile  all  difficulties,  apparent 
or  real,  in  a  divine  revelation,  and  to  make  everything  harmonize 
with  its  conclusions.  We  may  not  indeed,  and  cannot,  be  required 
to  receive  in  a  divine  revelation  what  is  clearly  contradictory, 
or  palpably  absurd.  God's  revelation  to  man  never  can  contra- 
dict His  revelation  in  man.  But  we  may  be,  and  are,  required 
to  receive  much  that  we  cannot  fully  comprehend,  that  is  above, 
though  not  contrary  to  our  reason.  Such  we  believe,  in  some  of 
its  aspects,  to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  It  is  above  our  rea- 
son. We  cannot,  even  by  the  most  diligent  searching,  find  out 
God.  The  knowledge  is  too  wonderful  for  us :  we  cannot  attain 
to  it. 

This  may  prepare  us  to  look  more  calmly  at  some  of  the  alleged 
difficulties  and  objections,  and  we  may  discover  that  they  result 
from  our  inability  fully  to  comprehend  the  subject,  and  that  they 
are  not  peculiar  to  this  doctrine  alojie,  nor  even  to  theology,  but  as 
Sir  William  Hamilton  truly  observes  :  "  No  difficulty  emerges  in 
theology,  which  has  not  previously  emerged  in  philosophy." 


THE    TRINITY.  2i3 

The  most  current  and  plausible  objections  to  this  doctrine  are 
such  as  the  following: 

I.  That  a  trinity  of  persons  is  inconsistent  with  the  unity  of  the 
Godhead.  We  are  told  that  unity  and  trinity  cannot  be  true  of  the 
same  Being,  and  that  it  is  as  absurd  as  to  maintain  that  one  can  be 
three,  or  three  one.  Those  who  hold  to  a  trinity  of  persons  are 
charged  with  tri-theism.  This  objection,  almost  as  old  as  Christi- 
anity, is  repeated  with  as  much  confidence  as  though  it  were  self- 
evident,  and  need  only  be  stated  to  be  admitted  ;  and  though  an- 
swered a  thousand  times,  is  still  paraded  as  unanswerable. 

We  readily  admit  that  nothing  can  be  received,  even  from  a  divine 
revelation, that  contradicts  our  intutitivebeliefor  necessary  judgment. 
We  cannot  be  made  to  believe  that  two  and  two  are  five,  nor  can  we 
believe  that  one  is  three  in  the  sense  that  it  is  one.  One  is  one,  and 
can  be  neither  more  nor  less,  and  so  of  three. 

It  can  hardly  be  necessary  to  say  that  no  orthodox  believer  has 
ever  been  guilty  of  the  folly  of  maintaining  that  one  is  three,  or 
three  one,  in  the  same  sense.*  We  do  not  affirm  unity  and  trinity 
of  the  same  thing,  but  of  what  is  entirely  different.  We  affirm  unity 
of  the  \ery  nature,  or  being,  or  essence  of  God — that  it  is  one — and 
that  in  that  sense,  he  is  absolutely  one  God,  and  that  besides  him 
there  is  none  else.  But  in  this  one  God,  one  in  essence  and  being, 
we  affirm  a  trinity  of  subsistences  or  persons,  as  Father,  Son  and 
Holy  Ghost,  co-eternal  and  co-equal.  And  as  we  affirm  unity  and 
trinity,  not  at  all  of  the  same  subject,  but  the  one  of  the  very  essence, 
and  the  other  of  personal  distinctions  or  subsistences  in  that  essence, 
it  is  not,  and  cannot  be  shown  to  be  contradictory.  Whatever  diffi- 
culties there  may  be  about  the  divine  personality,  and  the  existence 
of  a  three- fold  personality  in  the  divine  unity,  (and  we  do  not  attempt 
to  deny  them,)  he  would  gain  little  credit  for  his  logic  who  would 
undertake  to  affirm  that  it  involves  a  contradiction  in  terms. 

Various  analogies  have  been  employed,  drawn  from  man's  own 
spiritual  nature,  and  from  objects  in  the  world  around  us,  to  illus- 
trate this  subject,  and  to  aid  in  removing  the  apparent  difficulties. 
The  most  profound  thinkers  the  world  has  ever  known,  from  Plato  to 
the  present  day,  have  indeed  maintained,  on  philosophical  grounds, 
the  doctrine  of  a  trinity,  as  the  truest  and  most  exalted  conception 

^  Augustine  says,  "  Unde  non  audetnus  dicere  unani  essentiatn,  tres  substan- 
tias, sed  unam  essentiam  [yel  subsianiiam),  tres  personasT 


34  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  the  one  true  and  living  God.*  However  ingenious  and  striking 
some  of  these  speculations  and  illustrations  may  be,  our  faith  does 
not  rest  on  them,  but  on  the  divine  Word.  That  Word  does  not, 
and  cannot,  contradict  itself,  and  there  are  analogies  enough,  com- 
bined with  the  best  efforts  of  human  reason,  to  reconcile  every  candid 
mind  to  this  incomprehensible  mystery  in  the  being  of  God. 

2.  That  three  persons,  each  possessing  all  the  attributes  of  infinite 
Being,  cannot  co-exist ;  or  that  there  cannot  be  more  than  one  infi- 
nite Being.     The  co-existence  of  more   than  one  infinite  Being  is 

*  For  the  Pagan  doctrine  of  a  Trinity,  see  Cudworth's  Int.  Syst.  Along  with 
much  that  is  curious  and  learned,  the  author  says,  "  But,  besides  this  advantage 
from  the  ancient  Pagan  Platonists  and  Pythagoreans  admitting  a  Trinity  with 
their  theology,  in  like  manner  as  Christianity  doth  (whereby  Christianity  was 
the  more  recommended  to  the  philosophic  Pagans),  there  is  another  advantage 
of  the  same  extending  even  to  this  present  time,  probably  not  unintended  also 
by  Divine  Providence ;  that  whereas  bold  and  conceited  wits,  precipitately  con- 
demning the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  for  nonsense,  absolute  repugnancy  to  hu- 
man faculties,  and  impossibility,  have  thereupon  some  of  them  quite  shaken 
off  Christianity,  and  all  revealed  religion,  professing  only  Theism;  others  have 
frustrated  the  design  thereof,  by  paganizing  it  into  creature-worship  or  idolatry; 
this  ignorant  or  conceited  confidence  of  both  may  be  returned,  and  confuted 
from  hence,  because  the  most  ingenious  and  acute  of  all  the  Pagan  philoso- 
phers, the  Platonists  and  Pythagoreans,  who  had  no  bias  at  all  upon  them,  nor 
any  Scripture  revelation  that  might  seem  to  impose  upon  their  faculties,  but 
followed  the  free  sentiments  and  dictates  of  their  own  minds,  did  notwithstand- 
ing not  only  entertain  this  trinity  of  Divine  hypostases  eternal  and  uncreated, 
but  were  also  fond  of  the  hypothesis,  and  make  it  a  main  fundamental  of  their 
theology."     Vol.  II,  25. 

It  is  well  known  that  many  of  the  most  distinguished  philosophers  and  di- 
vines of  Germany  have  maintained  a  trinity  in  the  Godhead  as  a  matter  of  phil- 
osophic and  theistic  speculation  ;  and  that  according  to  Julius  Miiller,  "  This 
problem  "  (of  the  divine  personality)  "only  becomes  solved  by  the  idea  of  the 
Divine  Trinity ^ 

Coleridge  declares  :  "  I  am  clearly  convinced,  that  the  Scriptural  and  only 
true  idea  of  God  will,  in  its  development,  be  found  to  involve  the  idea  of  the 
Trinity.'' — Aids  to  Reflectioti. 

Morrell  says:  "  Philosophy  has  not  repudiated  the  existence  of  those  diversi- 
ties in  the  Divine  unity,  the  reflection  of  which  there  is  in  man  himself.  The 
spiritual  vision,  even  of  some  heathen  minds,  did  not  fail  to  see  in  the  infinite 
being  that  blending  of  unity  and  plurality,  which  is  the  type  of  all  perfection  ; 
and  to  the  Christian  idealist,  the  mystery  of  a  Trinity  has  rarely  proved  a  stone 
of  stumbling,  or  a  rock  of  offence." — Hist.  Philos.,  703. 

Much  more  of  the  same  character  might  be  adduced,  and  may  be  placed  as 
an  offset  to  those  who  talk  about  the  unreasonablc7iess  of  this  doctrine. 


THE    TRINITY. 


o:) 


supposed  to  involve  an  impossibility.  We  reply  first,  that  we  only 
maintain  and  teach  one,  so  far  as  absolute  being  or  essence  is  con- 
cerned. We  utterly  deny  the  existence  of  three  infinite  beings,  as 
separate  and  independent  existences,  involving  as  it  must  three 
Gods.  Against  any  such  view  the  orthodox  faith  has  always  pre- 
sented the  most  decided  opposition.  But  secondly,  as  really  held 
and  understood,  there  is  no  greater  difficulty  on  this  point,  than 
meets  us  elsewhere,  a^  in  a  number  of  divine  attributes,  "each  in- 
finite in  its  kind,  and  yet  all  together  constituting  but  one  infinite," 
or  in  the  co-existence  of  an  infinite  Being,  and  an  unlimited  number 
of  finite  beings.  This  is  just  the  point  at  which  Pantheism  stumbles 
and  takes  refuge  in  the  one  universal  substance.  Any  one  who 
has  duly  reflected  upon  this  subject  will  be  satisfied  that  the  diffi- 
culties he  encounters  are  only  such  as  are  common  to  any  and 
every  attempt  to  fathom  the  mysterious  depths  of  the  finite  and  the 
infinite,  or  to  explore  the  essence  and  perfections  of  God.* 

3.  That  as  the  Son  is  begotten^  and  the  Holy  S^\x\t proceeds  from 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  the  Father  must  exist  prior  to  the  Son,  and 
both  must  be  anterior  to  the  Spirit — that  these  three  persons  cannot 
be  co-eternal,  since  the  very  terms  employed  to  express  the  rela- 
tions existing  between  them  indicate  priority  and  succession. 
Here  again  the  difficulty  results  from  applying  to  the  Godhead 
terms  with  the  same  conceptions  as  when  applied  to  things  tem- 
poral and  changeable.  Among  human  beings,  where  there  is  a 
continual  succession,  one  must  precede  another,  and  one  is  older 
than  another.  But  this  is  not  so  with  God.  From  everlasting  to 
everlasting  he  is  the  same.  Time  has  no  application  to  him.  He 
is  no  older  now  than  eternal  ages  ago,  nor  will  eternal  ages  to  come 
make  any  change  in  his  being.  "The  Father  is  eternal,  the  Son  is 
eternal,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  eternal,"  says  the  Athanasian  Creed,  and 
so  says  the  Word  of  God;  and  this  is  just  as  comprehensible  as  the 
existence  of  one  eternal  essence.  Among  mortals,  as  Bishop  Pear- 
son says,  "the  father  necessarily  precedeth  the  son,  and  begetteth 
one  younger  than  himself  *  *  *  j^^U  ^i^;^  presupposeth  the 
imperfection  of  mortality  wholly  to  be  removed,  when  we  speak  of 
him  who  inhabiteth  eternity;  the  essence  which   God  always  had 

*  See  Mansel's  Limits  of  Religious  Thought,  164,  165;  McCosh's  Intuitions 
of  the  Mind,  415. 


36  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

without  beginning,  without  beginning  he  did  communicate;  being 
always  Father,  as  always  God." 

The  eternal  generation  of  the  Son,  and  procession  of  the  Spirit, 
find  their  parallel  difficulties  in  the  existence  of  substance  and  its 
properties.  The  latter  are  conceived  of  as  derived  and  dependent 
on  the  substance  in  which  they  inhere,  and  yet  they  are  co-existent, 
the  one  as  old  as  the  other.  We  cannot  conceive  of  substance 
without  its  properties,  and  yet  we  consider  the  one  as  derived  from 
the  other.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  sun  and  its  rays.  The 
rays  of  light  proceed  from  the  sun,  or  are  caused  by  the  great  lum- 
inary, and  yet  there  was  no  time  in  its  existence  when  it  was 
without  rays.  Mind  and  thought  may  be  regarded  as  still  more 
strikingly  analogous.  Thought  is  the  product  of  mind,  and  yet  the 
mind  cannot  be  conceived  of  as  existing  without  thinking  at  the 
same  time.  It  is  needless  to  multiply  or  extend  these  analogies. 
Our  position  is  this.  We  have  abundant  evidence  from  the  Word 
of  God,  that  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  are  eternal,  and  no  diffi- 
culty about  words  expressing  the  relations  existing  between  these 
persons,  can  be  allowed  to  shake  our  faith.  Were  we  to  do  so,  we 
must  for  the  same  reason  give  up  much  of  our  boasted  philosophy. 

What  has  been  said  has  not  been  presented  as  any  explanation  of 
this  inscrutable  mystery,  but  as  some  answer  to  those  who  raise  ob- 
jections against  what  they  cannot  comprehend,  and  hasten  to  pro- 
nounce it  absurd  or  impossible.  With  Barrow  we  say,  "  That  there 
is  one  Divine  Nature  or  Essence,  common  unto  three  persons  in 
comprehensibly  united,  and  ineffably  distinguished;  united  inessen- 
tial attributes,  distinguished  by  peculiar  idioms  and  relations;  all 
equally  infinite  in  every  divine  perfection,  each  different  from  the 
other  in  order  and  manner  of  subsistence;  that  there  is  a  mutual 
inexistence  of  one  in  all,  and  all  in  one;  a  communication  without 
any  deprivation  or  diminution  in  the  communicant;  an  eternal  gen- 
eration, and  an  eternal  procession,  without  precedence  or  succession, 
without  proper  causality  or  dependence ;  a  Father  imparting  his 
own,  and  the  Son  receiving  his  Father's  life,  and  a  Spirit  issuing 
from  both,  without  any  division  or  multipHcation  of  essence; — these 
are  notions  which  may  well  puzzle  our  reason,  in  conceiving  how 
they  agree,  but  should  not  stagger  our  faith  in  assenting  that  they 
are  true;  upon  which  we  should  meditate,  not  with  hope  to  compre- 
hend, but  with   dispositions   to  admire,  veiling  our   faces   in  the 


THE    TRINITY.  2>7 

presence,  and  prostrating  our   reason   at  the  feet  of  wisdom  so  far 
transcending  us."  * 

Conclusion. 

The  doctrine  of  this  Article,  though  profoundly  mysterious,  and 
in  some  of  its  aspects  bewildering  to  human  reason,  yet  not  only 
rests  on  the  sure  warrant  of  God's  Word,  but  is  one  of  deep,  prac- 
tical importance,  both  to  understanding  the  plan  of  redemption,  and 
to  the  work  of  our  personal  salvation.  It  were  a  great  mistake  to 
regard  it  as  merely  an  abstruse  speculation  in  Theology,  and  fitted 
only  for  the  discussion  of  the  schools.  The  humblest  Christian 
needs  to  understand,  not  indeed  the  scholastic  terms  and  various 
speculations  with  which  this  doctrine  has  been  encumbered,  but  the 
way  of  salvation  as  provided  by  the  Father,  prepared  and  made 
attainable  by  the  Son,  and  applied  and  sealed  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Without  this  knowledge  of  the  triune  God,  we  cannot  understand 
how  the  redemption  of  an  apostate  and  guilty  world  could  be  pos- 
sible;  and  just  in  proportion  as  we  shut  out  the  light  from  this 
quarter  do  we  obscure  the  whole  scheme  of  human  redemption; 
while  on  the  other  hand,  as  we  receive  and  embrace  the  truth, 
seeking  to  be  guided  by  it,  light  will  shine  upon  the  way  of  our 
reconciliation  to  the  Father,  through  the  death  and  intercession  of 
the  Son,  and  of  our  preparation  for  divine  fellowship  and  the 
heavenly  inheritance,  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit.  The 
truth  and  force  of  this  will  be  seen  by  a  glance  at  a  few  of  the 
great  fundamental  doctrines  of  salvation. 

I.  The  Incarnation.  This  lies  at  the  very  basis  of  redemption. 
It  is  a  felt  want  of  man's  religious  nature,  and  enters  in  some  sense 
into  most  leading  systems  of  religion.  Without  it  God  remains  at 
infinite  distance  from  man,  and  there  is  no  possibility  of  satisfaction 
for  sin,  or  of  union  between  the  creature  and  the  Creator.  But  we 
have  no  reasonable  account  of  any  incarnation  except  that  revealed 
in  the  Bible,  where  the  eternal  Word  becomes  flesh,  and  the  mys- 
terious Being,  who  tabernacles  among  men,  is  Immanuel — God 
with  us.  The  whole  Trinity  unite  in  this  wonder  of  heaven  and 
earth.  God  sends  forth  his  own  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made  under 
the  law — the  angel  announces  to  the  Virgin,  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall 
come  upon  thee,  and  the  power  of  the  Highest   shall   overshadow 

*  Barrow's  Works,  Vol.  II,  150. 


T,S  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

thee ;  therefore  also  that  holy  thing,  which  shall  be  born  of  thee, 
shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God."  The  Son  himself  witnessed,  "  I 
came  forth  from  the  Father,  and  am  come  into  the  world."  We 
have  then  the  Son  of  God,  through  the  cooperation  of  the  entire 
Godhead,  becoming  incarnate,  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh."  And 
wherever  this  distinction  has  been  denied,  or  the  doctrine  of  God 
incarnate  rejected,  there  the  whole  doctrine  of  redemption  through 
the  Son  has  fallen  with  it. 

2.  T/te  Atonement.  That  God  may  be  just  and  justify  the  sinner, 
an  atonement  is  necessary.  Without  the  shedding  of  blood  there 
is  no  remission  of  sins.  Divine  justice  must  be  satisfied.  The  law 
must  be  magnified  and  made  honorable  in  the  eyes  of  all  creatures. 
Sin  must  be  punished  and  made  abominable.  Every  demand  on 
the  part  of  a  holy  and  just,  yet  merciful  God,  and  also  on  the  part 
of  sinful,  guilty  men,  must  be  fully  met. '  Who  will  pay  the  ransom  ? 
Who  will  make  atonement  for  human  guilt,  and  procure  pardon  and 
peace  ?  No  created,  dependent  being  could  do  this.  Not  silver  or 
gold  could  pay  the  ransom,  or  blood  of  lambs  wash  away  sin.  God's 
own  Son  must  suffer  and  die.  The  sword  must  awake  against  the 
man  that  is  fellow  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts.  Christ  Jesus  must  agonize 
and  expire  on  the  cross  that  he  may  bear  our  sins  in  his  own  body 
on  the  tree.  His  sufferings  and  death,  as  the  God-man,  make  a  full 
atonement,  and  the  only  atonement,  for  perishing  sinners.  But 
without  the  divinity  and  personality  of  the  Son,  how  could  he  give 
"  himself  for  us,  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God  for  a  sweet-smell- 
ing savor  ?"  Or  how  could  "  the  blood  of  Christ,  who  through  the 
eternal  Spirit  offered  himself  without  spot  to  God,  purge  the  con- 
science from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God  ?"  Deny  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  and  you  deny  the  offering  of  the  Son  of  God, 
through  the  Eternal  Spirit,  the  only  acceptable  atonement,  through 
which  the  Father  can  pardon  and  receive  penitent  sinners  unto 
favor,  and  make  them  heirs  of  life. 

3.  Regeneration.  Man  needs  regeneration  just  as  much  as  re- 
demption. His  powers  are  as  depraved  as  his  soul  is  guilty.  He 
can  no  more  create  within  himself  a  new  heart  than  he  can  pardon 
his  own  sins.  He  not  only  needs  divine  grace,  and  divine  assistance, 
he  needs  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  must  be  born  again 
of  the  Spirit,  or  he  can  never  see  the  Kingdom  of  God.  The  Spirit 
coming  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  takes  of  the  things  of  Christ, 


THE    TRINITY,  39 

reveals  to  the  soul  the  hidden  things  of  God,  convinces  of  sin,  creates 
anew  the  heart,  and  transforms  the  whole  spiritual  man  into  the 
likeness  of  Jesus  Christ.  Thus  redeemed  unto  God  by  the  blood 
of  the  Lamb,  and  renewed,  by  the  Spirit,  believers  become  the  pecu- 
liar possession  of  Christ,  "  an  holy  temple  in  the  Lord,  in  whom," 
says  Paul,  they  "  are  builded  together  for  an  habitation  of  God 
through  the  Spirit." 

Now  all  this  is  illustrated  in  the  work  of  each  individual's  salva- 
tion, and  without  it,  his  salvation  must  be  to  us  absolutely  incon- 
ceivable. The  Father  draws  the  sinner  to  himself,  but  he  can  only 
come  to  the  Father  through  the  Son,  by  "  the  new  and  living  way" 
prepared  through  his  shed  blood  and  continued  intercession.  By 
the  "  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he  receives  power  to  draw  nigh, 
that  he  may  receive  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  inheritance  among  them 
which  are  sanctified  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus. 

And  thus  will  each  soul,  ransomed  from  the  power  of  sin  and 
Satan,  unite  with  the  Church  of  all  ages  in  ascribing  the  glory  of 
salvation  to  the  Father  who  has  loved,  and  to  the  Son  who  was 
redeemed,  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit  who  has  sanctified — three  persons 
in  one  God — to  whom  "  be  glory  and  majesty,  dominion  and  power, 
now  and  ever.     Amen." 


ARTICLE  11. 


ORIGINAL  SIN. 

BY  S.  SPRECHER,  D.  D.   LL.D. 


"Our  churches  hkewise  teach,  that  since  the  fall  of  Adam,  all  men  who 
are  naturally  engendered  are  born  with  sin,  that  is,  without  the  fear  of  God  or 
confidence  towards  him,  and  with  sinful  propensities  ;  and  that  this  disease,  or 
original  sin,  is  truly  sin,  and  still  condemns  and  causes  eternal  death  to  those 
who  are  not  born  again  by  baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  They  condemn  the  Pelagians  and  others,  who  deny  that  natural  depravity 
is  sin,  and  who,  to  the  disparagement  of  the  glory  of  Christ's  merits  and  bene- 
fits, contend  that  man  may  be  justified  before  God  by  the  powers  of  his  own 
reason." 

THE  subject  of  the  second  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  is 
one  of  the  most  important  and  difficult  within  the  whole  range 
of  theological  thought.  The  connection  of  the  fall  of  Adam  with  the 
universality  of  sin  in  his  posterity,  though  always  shrouded  in 
mystery  for  human  speculation,  will  never  lose  its  practical  bearing 
upon  human  conduct. 

The  Confession  itself  is  the  expression  of  a  renewed  experience 
of  the  great  facts  of  sin  and  grace — a  re-assertion  of  the  cardinal 
doctrines  of  the  gospel.  The  statements  in  this  Article  are  evi- 
dently made  in  the  interest  of  the  great  subject  of  gratuitous  justifi- 
cation and  sanctification,  through  the  mediation  of  the  blessed 
Saviour  and  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Luther  was  led,  by 
personal  experience,  down  into  the  depths  of  consciousness,  where 
the  thoughts  accuse,  or  excuse,  one  another,  and  up  to  the  heights 
of  divine  light,  where  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven 
against  all  unrighteousness  of  men.  The  sinfulness  and  condemna- 
tion, the  helpless  guilt  and  hopeless  depravity  of  man,  were  to  him 

40 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  4I 

facts  of  consciousness;  the  freeness  and  fulness  of  the  divine  salva- 
tion, matters  of  personal  experience.  As  his  experience  was  of  the 
same  marked  kind  with  that  of  Augustine,  so  is  there  a  similarity 
between  his  anthropological  views  and  those  of  this  distinguished 
father  in  the  Church.  And  as  the  Reformation  started  from  a  prac- 
tical point  of  view,  so  is  the  Augsburg  Confession  a  practical  ex- 
pression of  the  cardinal  doctrines  involved  in  this  great  spiritual  re- 
volution of  Christendom. 

The  Papacy  had  appropriated  the  ecclesiastical  errors  of  Augus- 
tine and  the  anthropological  errors  of  Pelagius.  The  scholastic 
theology  had  degenerated  into  the  superstition  of  the  Augustinian 
ecclesiasticism,  and  the  scepticism  of  the  Pelagian  anthropology — 
the  mere  opus  operatinn  of  the  one,  and  the  mere  external  morality 
of  the  other.  The  Reformers  rejected  the  errors  of  both;  but  they 
adopted  the  great  fundamentals  of  the  Augustinian  anthropology. 
A  deep  consciousness  of  sin  led  Luther  to  receive  the  doctrine  of 
organic  connection  with  Adam  in  the  fall;  to  pronounce  natural  de- 
pravity a  positive  corruption  of  human  nature,  an  inborn  enmity  to 
God;  to  ascribe  to  man,  as  the  consequence  of  it,  an  entire  impo- 
tency  to  the  divine  life,  a  helpless  exposure  to  the  divine  wrath — 
and  from  it,  as  the  root,  to  derive  all  other  sins.  Hence  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  describes  the  state  into  which  men,  by  natural  prop- 
agation, are  born,  as  the  want  of  the  fear  of  God  and  of  confidence 
in  God,  and  the  presence  of  evil  lust  {concupiscentid) ;  and  regards 
this  mass  of  corruption,  as  really  sin,  on  account  of  which  all  who 
are  not  born  again  by  baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  condemned, 
and  liable  to  eternal  punishment. 

The  article  requires  attention  to  the  origin,  the  coitetits,  the  char- 
acter, the  consequences,  of  this  sin. 

I.  The  origin  of  it,  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  name  by  which  they 
designate  it:  Peccatum  Origiuis — Erbsuendc.  By  this  they  mean  the 
one  original  sin — the  sin  of  origin — the  inherited  sin — the  sin  trans- 
mitted to  us  with  the  human  nature — the  sin  received  with  the  ori- 
gin of  our  being.  In  teaching  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Latin 
anthropology,  they  naturally  use  the  words  of  Augustine,  by  whom 
it  received  its  full  enunciation.  Pelagius  said,  that  all  good  and  evil 
— all  praise-worthiness  or  blame-worthiness  is  in  actual  sin — is  in 
actual  obedience  or  transgression.  Sin,  therefore,  cannot  come  by  birth, 
but  only  from  acts  of  free-will.     Adam  could  not  originate  sin,  once 


42  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

for  all;  but  each  individual  sinner  must  originate  the  first  sin  in  his 
own  case — the  first  sin  oi  tlie  Jiinnan  nature  zvJiicJi  is  in  Jiiin.  Augus- 
tine, on  the  contrary,  said,  that  Adam,  in  his  free  self-determination, 
had  by  one  sin — a  peculiar  sin — a  sin  which  only  the  Protoplast, 
the  First  Man,  could  commit — a  sin  which  could  never  have  been 
committed  by  any  of  his  successors  in  human  nature — a  sin  which 
could  not  be  repeated  even  by  himself — a  sin  of  which  his  subse- 
quent acts  of  transgression,  and  the  sins  of  other  men,  are  only 
manifestations  and  developments; — had,  by  this  one  act,  corrupted 
the  human  nature  which  was  in  his  person,  and  which  is  in  all  the 
individuals  of  his  posterity.  It  is,  therefore,  Peccatum  Originis — 
Erbsuende — the  first  sin  in  the  world,  the  first  sin  in  every  man ; 
the  sin  inherited  from  Adam,  by  every  individual  man,  naturally  en- 
gendered "  since  the  fall."  By  Peccatum  Originis  they  point  to  the 
mode  and  character  of  the  origin  of  individual  men,  since  the  fall, 
as  distinguished  from  that  Jiisiitia  Originis,  with  which  the  indivi- 
dual Adam,  and  the  human  nature  which  was  in  him,  came  origi- 
nally from  the  hand  of  God  ;  the  former,  by  generation,  from  the  sin- 
ful Adam;  the  latter,  by  creation,  from  the  holy  God — the  one  sin- 
ful, the  other  hol}^  This  sin  did  not  begin  with  the  origin  of  the 
human  nature  itself  in  creation.  Man,  generically  and  individually, 
was  created  hoi}' ;  human  nature,  as  a  species,  was  created  holy,  and 
it  was  good,  as  it  existed  in  individuals  by  creation;  Adam  was 
created  righteous  and  Eve  was  created  pure,  out  of  the  holy  human 
nature  w^hich  was  in  Adam.  The  Confessors  would  distinguish, 
with  Augustine,  between  substance  and  quality  in  human  nature, 
regarding  the  former,  as  coming  from  the  immediate  agency  of  God; 
the  latter,  as  resulting  from  the  free  act  act  of  man — would,  with  the 
framers  of  the  Formula  of  Concord  at  a  later  day,  have  declared 
original  sin  an  accident,  inseparable,  indeed,  during  the  period  be- 
tween the  sinful  birth  on  earth,  and  the  holy  glorification  in  heaven, 
but  still  only  an  accident  to  human  nature,  and  not  a  constituent 
element  of  its  substance.  Hence  they  do  not  call  it  Peccatum 
natitrale,  nor  Peccatum  natures,  but  Peccatum  Originis.  They  refer 
not  to  the  mere  fact  of  the  possession  of  the  common  human  nature; 
for  that,  being  the  result  of  creation,  is  good;  nor  to  the  mere  fact 
of  the  possession  of  an  individual  human  nature,  for  this,  also,  is  a 
pure  creation  of  God  in  the  first  individuals;  but  to  the  manner  in 
which,   since  the  fall,  all  men  become  partakers   of  the   common 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  43 

human  nature,  and  receive  their  individual  being — to  the  fact  that 
all  men  naturally  engendered,  since  the  fall,  spring  not  by  creation, 
but  by  birth  from  the  human  nature  which,  in  and  through  Adam, 
apostatized,  after  it  had  been  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holi- 
ness. This  is  the  Pcccatum  Originis,  the  beginning  and  the  source 
of  all  sin.  This  distinction  is  made  still  more  clear  by  the  phrase, 
"Since  the  fall  of  Adam" — no  sin  in  created  man  before ;  nothing 
but  sin,  in  the  generated  man,  while  unregenerate,  after.  It  is,  in- 
deed, Peccatuui  Origini^ — Erbsuende — for  it  is  inherited,  received 
at  the  moment  of  our  origin — received  with  nature,  not  merely  in 
connection  with  nature,  or  without  the  corruption  of  nature,  but  in 
such  a  way  that  it  is  inherent  in  our  nature.  We  received  it  from 
our  progenitors,  they  from  theirs,  and  so  on,  back  through  all  gen- 
erations, until  we  come  to  Adam,  who  inherited  nothing,  and  espe- 
cially no  sin;  for  he  had  neither  father  nor  mother — was  created, 
and  created  holy.  Adam  could  not  inherit  sin  from  him  who  made 
him;  for  God  would  not  originate  sin,  and  he  could  not  create  it. 
Man,  the  free  creature,  could,  and,  by  an  act  of  self-determination, 
did  originate  sin,  and  entailed  it,  with  its  consequence,  death,  upon 
all  his  children.  They  are  heirs,  and  it  is  the  sin  in  which  he  in- 
volved himself  and  the  entire  human  nature  which  was  in  him,  that 
is  the  deplorable  heritage  which  they  all  have  received.  "  Since  the 
fall,  all  men  naturally  engendered  are  born  in  sin;"  they  do  not  and 
cannot  originate  sin;  only  Adam  could  originate  it,  and  only  by 
that  one  sin.  Not  from  the  state  of  the  human  nature  before  the 
fall,  which  Adam  received  holy  from  the  hand  of  creation,  which  he 
should  have  propagated  holy,  and  which,  but  for  that  one  sin,  he 
would  have  propagated  holy;  not  from  the  state  of  the  human 
nature  in  which  men  would  have  been,  if  Adam  had  not  fallen  ;  but 
in  consequence  of  the  state  of  the  human  nature  :  "  Since  the  fall  of 
Adam,  all  men,  naturally  engendered,  are  begotten  and  born  in 
sin;"  have  inherited  from  that  original  progenitor,  an  "inherent 
disease  and  natural  depravity;  are  full  of  evil  lust  and  inclination, 
destitute  of  true  fear  of  God,  and  of  true  faith  in  him ;  "  and  are  im- 
mutably fixed  in  this  lamentable  condition,  until  haply  they  "  are 
born  again  by  baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost." 

2.  What  are  the  contents  of  this  original  sin — this   inherited  de- 
pravity ? 

The  Confessors  present  these  in  a  positive  and  a  privative  form. 


4-4  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

They  distinguish  between  something  inhering  in  man,  which  he 
ought  not  to  have,  and  something  which  he  ought  to  have,  but 
which  he  has  not.  Positively,  they  say:  "All  men  from  their  birth 
are  full  of  evil  lust  and  incUnation  {conciipiscc?itia)  ;"  and  privatively, 
"  They  can,  by  nature,  have  no  true  fear  of  God,  and  no  true  confi- 
dence in  him." 

Let  us  notice  first  the  positive,  in  the  material  of  natural  depra- 
vity. By  Lns^  wid  Neigung  in  the  German,  and  Concupiscciitia,  in 
the  Latin  copy,  they  do  not  mean  any  actual  sins,  either  in  thought, 
feeling  or  action;  but  something  back  of  these,  and  which  is  their 
source.  They  here  again  call  attention  to  the  one  original  and  origi- 
nating sin.  To  us  it  seems  strange,  that  these  words  should  ^glflfer^'^^ 
ally  have  been  translated  as  if,  in  the  original,  they  were  used  in  the 
plural,  instead  of  the  singular  number.  They  do  not  mean  any  in- 
dividual and  constitutional  desires  of  human  nature  (for  these  were 
originally  bestowed  in  creation);  nor  the  perverted  and  polluted  ex- 
ercise of  these  propensities,  as  distinguishable  and  separable  from 
the  Lust,  Neigung  or  Conaipiscentia ;  but  the  perverted  and  polluted 
exercise  of  these  desires  and  propensities,  as  invariably  the  result  of 
that  innate  depravity,  which  they  designate  particularly  by  the  use, 
in  the  singular  number,  of  each  and  all  of  these  words.  They  mean 
that  the  normal  state  of  man  is,  to  have  the  power  and  the  exercise 
of  the  power  to  fear  and  trust  God,  and  to  keep  all  the  faculties  and 
impulses  of  his  nature  in  a  state  of  obedience  to  the  divine  Law — 
and  that  in  his  depravity  he  has  lost  this  power.  In  his  original 
state,  he  possessed  and  exercised  it;  and  though  the  possession  and 
exercise  of  it  were  gifts  of  the  creative  hand,  yet  was  it  a  free  power 
and  a  free  exercise.  Adam  was  most  free  in  his  most  perfect  obe- 
dience; but  as  he  was  free,  he  could,  in  his  own  self-determination, 
lose  this  power  to  control  his  constitutional  appetites  and  desires, 
and  to  love  and  fear  his  God;  and  the  act,  by  which  he  would  lose 
it,  would  also  induce  a  sinful  and  ruling  inclination,  as  a  permanent 
source  of  the  sinful  exercise  of  all  his  constitutional  faculties  and 
susceptibilities.  To  such  an  inherent  depravity,  which  has  taken 
the  place  of  the  holy  disposition  with  which  man  was  created,  they 
refer  in  the  use  of  the  words  Z?/i'/,  Ncigimg,  Conaipiscentia.  Hence, 
when  their  Romish  opponents  undertook  to  construe  this  Article, 
so  as  to  make  these  words  mean  particular  and  individual  evil  de- 
sires— which  are  artual  sin's — they  declare,  in  the  Apology,  that  it 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  45 

is  2i  false  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of  the  words  of  the  Article, 
when  their  opponents  say,  "  That  to  be  without  the  fear  of  God, 
and  without  faith  in  him,  is  a  charge  of  actual  sins;"  and  appeal 
to  the  German  copy  to  show  that  they  deny  "  To  all  who  are  born 
according  to  the  sensual  nature,  not  only  the  exercise,  but  the 
ability — the  gift  to  produce,  $:c."  "  We  say,  namely,  that  man  so 
born,  has  the  evil  inclination,  and  cannot  produce,  &c."  "  In  this 
sense,  the  Latin  also  denies  to  nature  the  capacity,  that  is  the  gift 
and  power  to  effect,  &c."  "As  by  the  expression  evil  desire,  we 
mean  not  only  effects  or  fruits,  but  a  perduring  inclination  of 
nature."  "  These  are  the  reasons  why,  in  the  description  of  original 
sin,  we  both  mentioned  the  evil  inclination,  and  denied  to  the  natural 
powers  of  man,  fear  and  confidence  towards  God.  We  wished  to 
call  attention  to  the  fact,  that  original  sin  embraces  all  these, 
ignorance  of  God,  contempt  of  God,  want  of  fear  before  God,  and  of 
confidence  toward  him — the  inability  to  love  God."  "  The  same 
thing  lies  in  the  definition  of  Augustine,  who  is  in  the  habit  of  so 
defining  original  sin,  as  to  make  it  the  evil  inclination  "  *  *  which 
"  came  in,  after  the  loss  of  righteousness." 

They  evidently  mean  something  different  from  a  natural  faculty 
or  constitutional  tendency,  which  comes  from  the  creative  hand — 
something,  which  man  could  superinduce  upon  his  constitution, 
and  which  he  did  superinduce,  in  the  Fall — something,  consequently, 
which  is  blameworthy  and  not  indifferent,  as  would  be  a  normal 
susceptibility  or  infirmity;  hence  they  say,  in  the  Apology:  "Au- 
gustine has  refuted  *  *  the  opinion  *  *  that  this  inclination  is  no 
fault  in  man  ;  but  rather  something  morally  indifferent,  as  we  call 
bodily  pain  or  sickness  adiaphoron"  From  this  it  is  clear,  that, 
though  the  distinction  between  the  spiritual  and  the  organic  or  con- 
stitutional in  man  was  not  then,  as  fu41y,  in  consciousness,  or  in 
science  as  it  is,  at  this  day,  they  yet  meant  by  Concupiscentia,  Lust, 
Neigung,  a  spiritual  inclination  which,  being  sinful,  vitiates  all  the 
thoughts,  feelings  and  actions  of  men.  Hence,  they  could  con- 
sistently declare  that  acts  good  in  themselves,  when  performed  by 
unregenerate  men,  were  destitute  of  true  virtue.  We  have  many 
actual  desires,  and  these,  under  the  influence  of  original  sin,  are 
actual  sins;  but  they  are  not  the  Concupiscentia — the  natural  de- 
pravity. This  is  a  different  kind  of  lust,  a  lust  which  excites  in  us 
all  kinds  of  lusts.     In  point  of  permanency,  indeed,  it  is  like  these 


46  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

constitutional  desires;  like  the  animal  appetites,  it  may  not  always 
be  in  consciousness,  though  always  present.  As  the  immoderate 
and  sinful  appetites  for  food  and  drink,  in  the  glutton  and  the 
drunkard,  or  the  immoderate  and  sinful  desires  for  property,  in  the 
miser  and  the  spendthrift,  reveal  their  permanency  by  the  invari- 
ability of  their  excitement  on  the  presentation  of  their  objects;  so  a 
disposition  or  inclination  to  that  which  is  forbidden  by  the  Divine 
law,  lies  back  of  all  the  thoughts,  feelings  and  actions  of  men,  and 
manifests  its  permanence,  as  a  source  of  motive,  by  the  universality 
of  human  sinfulness.  The  Confessors  say  consequ;intly,  in  the 
Apology:  "  We  speak  of  an  inborn  evil  disposition  of  the  heart,  not 
of  actual  guilt  and  sin — for  we  say  that,  in  all  the  children  of  Adam, 
there  is  an  evil  lust  and  inclination;"  that  is,  one  comprehensive  in- 
clination to  all  that  which  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  God.  In  this 
sense  also,  they  supply  the  word  "full."  As  we  say  of  a  glutton  or 
a  drunkard,  he  is  full  of  the  desire  for  food  or  drink,  meaning  that 
this  desire  monopolizes  the  action  of  all  his  faculties;  so  when  they 
say  that  all  men  in  the  state  of  natural  depravity  are/z///  of  evil  lust 
and  inclination,  they  mean  that  there  is  in  them  a  full  source  of 
motive,  an  exhaustless  fountain  of  evil  impulses,  so  vitiating  all  the  ac- 
tions of  all  the  faculties  of  mind  and  body,  that  all  the  desires  of  man, 
which  should  go  out  after  God  and  spiritual  good,  tend  to  nothing 
but  the  transgression  of  God's  law  and  the  pursuit  of  all  evil.  It  is 
an  abiding  disposition,  producing  a  governing  purpose  against  holi- 
ness, and  for  sin. 

But  the  Confessors  pass  from  a  positive  to  a  privative  view  of  the 
contents  of  original  sin.  They  say,  that:  "  Since  the  fall  of  Adam 
all  men  naturally  engendered,  were  born  without  fear  of  God  or 
confidence  towards  him;"  that  is,  there  is  not  only  the  presence  of 
sin,  but  the  absence  of  holiness.  This  they  treat  as  a  real  want. 
Now  a  real  want  consists  not  simply  in  the  absence  of  a  thing,  but 
in  the  absence  of  a  thing  which  should  be  present.  The  destitution 
of  the  fear  of  God  and  of  confidence  toward  him,  is  not  simply  the 
absence  of  something,  but  the  absence  of  something  that  should  be 
present  in  man.  They  speak  consequently,  not  merely  negatively, 
but  privatively.  The  normal  condition  of  man  demands  the  pres- 
ence of  that  which  is  now  absent,  by  birth,  from  the  souls  of  all 
men.  The  absence  of  the  fear  of  God  and  of  confidence  in  him, 
from  an  irrational  animal,  is  not  a  real  want,  because  the  presence  of 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  •  47 

them  is  not  required  by  the  normal  state  of  its  being;  but  in  a 
rational  being  it  is  such,  because  without  the  presence  of  these 
qualities  he  is  not  what  he  is  required,  by  his  entire  constitution 
and  all  his  relations,  to  be.  This  destitution  is  as  real  a  departure 
from  the  original  and  proper  state  of  man,  as  would  be  the  absence 
of  reason.  As  a  spiritual  being  he  must  as  necessarily  have  the 
exercise  of  Divine  fear  and  confidence,  in  order  to  be  what  he  ought 
to  be,  as  he  must  possess  reason,  in  order  to  be  what  he  ought 
to  be.  Though  the  power  and  the  exercise  of  the  power  to  be  in 
this  condition  is  free,  yet  he  cannot  be  created  without  the  immedi- 
ate presence  of  both;  because  such  is  the  nature  of  his  being  and 
relations,  that  he  cannot  properly  be  in  a  state  of  either  opposition 
or  indifference  toward  God.  There  may  not  properly  elapse  a 
single  moment  from  his  creation,  without  his  fearing  and  trusting 
God ;  it  is  a  quality  inseparable  from  the  proper  state  of  his  being, 
to  be  determined  from  the  very  beginning  for  God  and  right — he 
must  be  created,  if  he  is  to  have  being  at  all,  in  righteousness  and 
true  holiness.  Men  ought  to  fear  God  and  trust  Him — should  have 
and  should  exercise  this  inclination — should  have  both  natural  and 
moral  ability  to  do  this;  they  had  it  in  their  first  estate,  they  should 
have  it  now;  and  as  they  have  it  not,  they  are  in  a  state  of  the  great- 
est possible  want.  This  aspect  of  the  subject  the  Confessors  present 
especially,  in  contrast  with  prevalent  Romish  views.  "  This  we  have 
added,"  says  the  Apology,  "viz.:  that  there  was  wanting  Divine  fear 
.and  faith "  *  *  because  the  scholastic  teachers  represent  the 
natural  depravity  as  less  than  it  really  is.  *  *  "When  they  speak 
of  the  original  (first)  sin,  they  conceal  the  important  wants  of  the 
human  nature,  or  the  absence  of  reverence  and  confidence  toward 
God,  and  the  presence  of  hatred  to  the  government  of  God,  terror 
at  the  justice  of  God,  anger  against  God,  despair  of  God's  favor,  re- 
liance upon  things  visible,  &c."  These  are  the  principal  wants  of 
human  nature.  *  *  "  Men  according  to  the  original  righteous- 
ness (the  state  of  innocence)  have  not  only  an  equable  temperament 
of  the  body;  but  also  these  gifts,  viz.:  a  certain  knowledge  of  God, 
reverence  toward  him,  confidence  in  him,  at  least  uprightness,  and 
the  power  to  do  it."  *  *  <■  Hence,  the  old  explanation,  when  it 
says,  that  original  sin  is  the  destitution  of  righteousness,  denies  to 
man  not  only  the  obedience  of  the  lower  powers,  but  also  knowl- 
edge of  God,  fear,  &c.,  or,  at  least,  the  power  to  produce  these." 


48  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

*  *  "  Paul  speaks  expressly  of  original  sin,  as  a  want."  *  * 
"  Easily  will  the  reader  now  perceive  that  to  be  without  the  true 
fear  of  God  and  without  true  faith  in  him,  is  not  merely  to  be  guilty 
of  actual  sins;  for  these  are  abiding  zvants  in  human  nature,  as  long 
as  it  is  not  renewed  (regenerated)." 

3.  But  equally  important  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Confessors,  con- 
cerning the  character  of  original  sin.  They  declare  that  this  in- 
herent disease  and  natural  depravity  is  really  sin,  not  only  called 
sin,  but  is  sin,  in  the  strictest  sense.  They  seem  simply  to  have 
asked:  "What  does  the  Divine  law  require,  and  what  is  natural  de- 
pravity ;"  and  the  answer,  from  conscience  and  the  Bible,  being  "  It  is 
a  want  of  conformity  to  that  which  man  ought  to  be,"  they  conclude 
that  it  is  really  sin  ;  that  it  properly  bears  the  name,  and  truly  pos- 
sesses the  character  of  sin.  To  the  objection  that  thi.<i  would  repre- 
sent man  himself  as  sin,  because  it  shows  him  to  be,  in  his  nature 
and  by  birth,  against  the  law  of  God;  they  would  answer,  that  is  not 
properly  man,  as  to  the  substance  of  his  nature,  but  as  to  a  quality 
inhering  in  his  nature — a  quality  acquired  since  creation,  though 
present  at  generation  and  birth;  not  man  according  to  his  normal 
constitution,  but  in  his  fallen  state;  not  by  his  original  nature,  but 
by  an  accident  invariably  adhering  to  him,  is  he  contrary  to  God's 
law.  With  them,  it  was  a  practical  thing — a  dreadful,  but  unques- 
tionable fact.  And,  hence,  in  the  Apology,  they  confidently  ap- 
peal to  the  inner  consciousness  of  every  man,  and  to  the  revealed 
Word  of  God;  assured  that  the  response  will  be -that  there  is  a  per- 
manent inner  source  of  sin,  in  all  men,  from  the  first  moment  of 
their  being;  and  that  this  sinful  inclination  is  really  contrary  to 
God's  law,  is  really  sin. 

In  order  to  appreciate  fully  this  declaration  of  the  Confessors,  we 
must  look  at  the  state  of  things,  in  view  of  which  it  was  made. 
All,  with  the  exception  of  the  Pelagians,  agreed  that  natural  de- 
pravity is  an  evil ;  but  it  was  a  question  whether  it  is  properly  called 
sin — sin,  in  the  strict  sense — sin,  in  the  sense  of  guilt.  The  idea  of 
the  Greek  anthropology — that  original  sin,  being  merely  a  propa- 
gated physical  corruption,  and,  consequently,  not  in  the  strict  sense, 
sin — culminated  in  Pelagianism.  This  extreme  went  down  under 
the  weight  of  Augustinianism;  but  the  old  idea,  in  the  form  of  Semi- 
Pelagianism,  and,  at  last,  under  the  name  of  Augustinianism,  but 
with  a  preponderating  tendency  to  the  side  of  Pelagianism,  became 
the  predominant  anthropology  of  the  Papal  Church. 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  49 

This  system  taught  that  original  righteousness  did  not  belong 
to  man's  normal  condition — was  not  a  gift  of  creation,  but  a  gift  of 
grace;  not  a  natural  endowment,  but  a  doiitim  supcradditum.  It 
agreed  with  Pelagianism,  that  man,  by  creation,  was  neither  holy 
nor  sinful ;  but  it  said  that  he  was  made  holy  by  a  gift,  superadded 
to  the  gifts  of  creation.  He  was  originally  neither  positively  right- 
eous, nor  positively  unrighteous — was  in  pitris  iiaturalibiis ;  his  soul, 
in  its  immortal  aspirations,  going  out  after  spiritual  good ;  his  body, 
with  its  carnal  appetites  craving  sensual  gratification — to  check  the 
conflict,  to  maintain  the  proper  balance,  to  give  to  the  higher 
powers  their  appropriate  dominion  in  his  nature — he  was  endowed 
with  a  superadded  gift,  not  of  creation,  but  by  grace.  In  his  fall, 
therefore,  he  lost  no  natural  gift;  he  simply  returned  to  his  original 
state.  Some,  it  is  true,  distinguished  only  in  idea  between  the  state 
mpuris  natiiralibtis,  and  that  of  the  domuii  super additum,  and  regarded 
the  act  of  creation  in  the  one,  and  the  act  of  grace  in  the  other,  as 
co-etaneous  in  the  perfection  of  man  in  original  righteousness ;  and 
consequently,  sin  as  reigning  among  men  since  the  fall,  not  only  as 
a  consequence  of  the  concttpisccntia,  but  as  inherited.  But  the  great 
majority,  with  their  high  estimate  of  the  powers  of  man,  would  not, 
even  in  this  sense,  admit  an  original  sin ;  but  ascribed  to  the  fall  of 
Adam  only  the  consequence  that  his  posterity  are  punished  for  his 
sake.  T\\QJitstitia  originalis,  and  the  pitra  naturalia  were  to  be  dis- 
tinguised  not  only  ideally,  but  actually,  and  the  former  regarded  as 
coming  to  the  latter  only  at  a  later  period,  as  donum  supcradditum^ 
The  ji/s/itm  originalis  is  lost  indeed  by  the  sin  of  Adam,  but  in  such 
a  way  and  manner  that  the  human  nature  suffers  no  change  or 
harm  ;  the  conciipisccntia  has  indeed  been  deprived  of  the  rein  by 
which  it  was  before  restrained  and  guided  ;  but  it  is  not  itself  sin, 
and  is  only  stimulated,  and  that  not  positively,  but  only  privatively, 
to  crave  the  sensual  and  the  agreeable.  The  sin  of  Adam  consists 
in  the  loss  of  the  holiness  and  righteousness  received  as  a  super- 
added gift,  in  a  weakened  and  oppressed  will,  and  in  the  tendency 
of  the  Coiicupisccnlij,  itself  innocent,  to  lead  to  sin,  and  conse- 
quently punishment  and  death.  The  sin  of  Adam  bears  the  same 
relation  to  posterity  that  the  crime  of  a  rebel  in  political  society 
does  to  his  innocent  children — where  not  only  the  guilty  father,  but 
the  innocent  children,  are  for  the  father's  sake  sometimes  the  subjects 
of  punishment.     If  a  prince 'should  put  his  livery  upon  a  naked 


50  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

peasant,  with  the  promise  that  he  and  his  posterity  should  always 
wear  it,  if  he  behaved  well ;  the  loss  of  the  livery,  on  transgression, 
would  simply  leave  the  peasant,  and  his  children  after  him,  in  the 
same  condition  in  which  he  was  before  he  had  this  gift,  and  in  which 
they  would  have  been  if  he  had  never  received  it.  So  the  subject 
Adam,  in  sinning  against  the  Great  King,  lost  the  livery  of  heaven, 
in  which  he  was  clothed  by  the  donum  siiperadditiun,  and  is  left, 
with  the  children  which  he  has  propagated,  in  puns  natiirahbus. 
The  depravity  of  the  human  heart  is  not  original  sin,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  but  is  only  a  punishment  of  it ;  it  is  neither  good  nor  bad,  and 
not,  properly  speaking,  sin — is  only  called  sin  in  the  sense  that,  if 
not  resisted,  the  consequence  is  sin.  Man  was  originally  created 
with  this  inclination,  and  that  it  did  not  operate  in  Adam  before  the 
fall,  resulted  not  from  the  fact  that  it  was  not  in  him,  but  because  it 
was  held  in  check  by  that  supernatural  grace — the  donum  snperad- 
dituni. 

This  was  the  prevalent  Papal  Anthropology  at  the  period  of  the 
Reformation,  and  it  was  especially  upheld  by  Bishops  Ambrosius 
Catharinus  and  Albertus  Pighius,  These  men,  in  books  published 
against  Luther,  maintained  that  there  is  nothing  in  man  since  the  fall, 
which  does  not  belong  to  the  essential  human  nature — the  pura 
natiiralia;  that  the  consequence  of  Adam's  sin  is  solely  the  imputa- 
tion of  the  fall.  Fresh  and  lively  in  his  sense  of  sin,  and  of  par- 
doning grace,  it  was  the  lot  of  Luther  to  meet  this  great  error.  No 
wonder  that  it  led  him  to  make  special  efforts  to  revive  the  true 
doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  to  insist  upon  the  depth  and  guilt  of 
natural  depravity.  No  wonder  that  he  would  bring  out  anew  the 
doctrine  of  Augustine,  that  the  natural  and  normal  state  of  man's 
being,  as  he  came  trom  the  creative  hand,  necessarily  included  orig- 
nal  righteousness — that  man  was  made  by  the  Creator  what  he 
ought  to  be  ;  that  he  could  not  have  been  what  he  ought  to  be 
without  original  righteousness,  and  that  this  gift  of  righteousness 
could  not  be  superadded  to  the  gifts  of  creation,  for  that  would 
imply  a  period,  even  before  the  fall,  during  which  he  was  not  what 
he  ought  to  be.  No  wonder  that  he  should  reject  even  the  doctrine 
of  the  Greek  Anthropology — that  original  sin  being  merely  a  propa- 
gated physical  corruption,  and  consequently  involuntary,  is  not  sin 
in  the  sense  of  guilt — and  agree  with  the  Latin  Anthropology  that 
original  sin  is  not  only  in  the  lower  and  sensuous,  but  also  in  the 


ORIGINAL   SIN.  5  I 

higher  and 'spiritual  powers;  that  it  is  voluntary  in  the  sense  oi  self- 
will,  and  consequently  is  really  sin;  that  even  infants  are  guilty,  be- 
cause they  possess  not  merely  a  corrupt,  sensuous  nature,  but  a 
sinful  bias  of  will. 

In  this  work  the  Confessors  join,  and  declare  that  this  depravity 
is  really  sin.  "The  scholastic  teachers  declare,"  says  the  Apology, 
"that  nothing  is  sinful  which  is  not  done  of  free  will.  These  prin- 
ciples hold  with  philosophers  concerning  human  government,  but 
they  do  not  hold  under  the  Divine  Government."  The  state,  they 
would  say,  deals  with  man  as  he  is,  because  she  has  received  him  as 
he  is  ;  having  received  him  with  this  inability,  she  has  no  right  to 
require  what  he  is  not  now  able  to  perform;  but  the  Divine  Govern- 
ment deals  with  him  as  he  ought  to  be;  having  received  him  holy, 
his  present  inability  being  his  own  production,  having  freely  lost 
the  ability  with  which  he  was  primarily  gifted,  and  which  he  had 
when  he  became  the  subject  of  the  Divine  Government;  he  is  under 
obligation  to  possess  the  original  righteousness,  and  consequently 
all  his  sins,  both  original  and  actual,  are  guilt.  Their  opponents, 
they  say,  "do  not  regard  the  evil  inclination  as  really  sin,  not  as  a 
fault  or  corruption  of  the  nature  of  man,  but  only  as  a  servitude  or 
a  condition  of  mortality,  to  which  all  the  posterity  of  Adam  are 
subject,  on  account  of  the  fault  of  another.  *  *  It  is,  as  when 
slaves  are  born  of  a  slave-woman,  and  come  into  a  servile  condition 
without  diny  fault  cf  their  nature,  but  through  the  misfortune  of  their 
mother.  *  *  They  speak  of  it  as  an  evil  stimulant  [fames),  as  a 
particular  quality  (f  the  body,  and~in  order,  as  usual,  to  be  childish, 
they  have  raised  the  question.  Whether  this  particular  quality  of 
the  body  is  derived  from  eating  the  apple  [Contagia  Pojni),  or  from 
the  breath  of  the  serpent ;  whether  it  is  made  worse  by  medicine, 
etc."  *  *  They  maintain  that  this  inclination  is  punishment; 
Luther  says,  "  It  is  certainly  sin."  After  quoting  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture, the  Confessors  draw  the  conclusion  from  what  they  regard  as 
infallible  testimony  :  "  That  evil  inclination  is  sin,  which  though  not 
imputed  to  those  who  are  in  Christ,  yet  in  its  nature  deserves  death." 

And  this,  according  to  the  Confessors,  is  the  lamentable  condition 
of  the  whole  family  of  Adam.  All  men  naturally  engendered  are 
in  this  state  of  sin  and  guilt — not  even  excepting  the  blessed  Virgin. 
Nor  would  they  have  agreed  with  the  Calvinistic  doctrine,  that  the 
children  of  the  elect  were  members  of  the  kingdom  of  God  by  birth; 


52  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

but  declare  that  all  men  naturally  engendered,  whether  born  of  re- 
generate or  unregenerate  parents,  whether  infants  or  adults,  are 
born  in  sin,  and  that  this  inherent  disease  and  natural  depravity  is 
sin,  and  still  condemns  and  causes  eternal  death  to  all  those  who  are 
not  born  again  by  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  do  not 
mean  that  unbaptized  infants  are  lost;  they  speak  only  of  God's  re- 
vealed order;  and  while  they  do  say  that  he  binds  us  to  this  order, 
they  do  not  imply  that  he  binds  himself  by  it.  They  had  not  for- 
gotten that  John  the  Baptist  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from 
his  mother's  womb — that  the  dying  thief  entered  unbaptized  into 
Paradise — that  when  Jesus  had  said.  He  that  believeth  and  is  bap- 
tized shall  be  saved,  he  added  not,  He  that  believeth  not  and  is  not 
baptized  shall  be  damned;  but  simply,  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned — that  he  said.  Except  ye  be  converted  and  become  as  little 
children,  ye  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  God — that  it  is  not  the 
will  of  the  Father,  that  one  of  these  little  ones  should  perish.  Not 
the  unavoidable  deprivation  of  Baptism,  but  the  wilful  neglect  of  it, 
condemns.  Nor  is  the  doctrine  of  some  so-called  Old  Lutherans 
of  our  day,  that  the  faith  which  precedes  Baptism  is  not  yet  saving, 
in  accordance  with  the  views  of  these  first  Lutherans  in  the  early 
days  of  the  Reformation.  I  need  not  say,  therefore,  that  the  Con- 
fessors do  not  mean  that  God  has  no  other  way  or  means  of  regen- 
eration except  those  revealed  in  the  Bible,  or  that  unbaptized  in- 
fants, from  the  mere  absence  or  want  of  Baptism,  are  unregenerated, 
and  dying  in  infancy  are  unprepared  for  heaven.  They  speak  only 
of  the  revealed  order  of  salvation,  the  way  into  which  the  Gospel 
calls  us,  and  in  which  those  who  hear  the  Gospel  have  the  only  sure 
warrant  and  certain  pledge  of  regeneration.  To  subjects  who  have 
not  the  Gospel,  or  are  incapable  of  receiving  it,  this  declaration  does 
not  refer.  For  aught  it  teaches,  all  infants,  baptized  or  unbaptized, 
may  be  regenerated  and  saved.  But  if  regenerated  and  saved,  they 
are  regenerated  and  saved  by  the  grace  of  God  alone.  Sad  picture 
of  the  state  of  man — human  nature  like  a  great  giant  mortally  dis- 
eased in  every  part,  limb  and  organ ;  no  one  member  able  effectually 
to  help  another — the  leprous  hand  cannot  minister  to  the  diseased 
heart;  the  disordered  heart  cannot  send  a  healthful  life-current 
through  the  veins  of  the  perishing  members  of  the  great  body. 

But  whence  this  universality  of  human  depravity?     The  Confes- 
sors say,  Men  are  born  with  it.     The  Pelagians  said,  It  is  by  the  in- 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  53 

fluence  of  example,  and  the  power  of  habit;  the  Confessors,  Men  are 
born  in  sin.  The  Pelagians  said.  The  only  connection  between  the 
sin  of  Adam  and  the  sins  of  his  posterity,  is  the  connection  between 
example  and  imitation;  the  Confessors,  It  is  an  organic  connection. 
The  Pelagians  said,  The  only  power  by  which  sin  controls  the  pow- 
ers of  man  is  the  force  of  habit ;  the  Confessors,  It  is  the  result  of 
being  born  a  member  of  a  fallen  race.  The  Romanists  said,  All  men 
come  into  this  condition,  because,  according  to  the  order  of  God,  it 
is  a  punishment — per  viodian  reatus  per  debiii ;  the  Confessors,  all 
men  are  born  in  sin,  and  this  natural  depravity  is  really  sin. 

What  is  their  explanation  of  this  awful  fact?  Have  they  a  phi- 
losophy of  this  inborn  sin.  as  guilt?  Was  the  coneeption  of  natural 
depravity  as,  in  the  proper  sense  sin,  sustained  in  their  mind  by 
any  particular  theory  concerning  the  origin  of  the  human  soul  ? 
With  the  exception  of  the  Pelagians,  all  were  agreed  that  natural 
depravity  is  transmitted  by  propagation  from  Adam  ;  but  the  ques- 
tion was  whether  it  is  merely  inherited  evil,  or  whether  it  is  inher- 
ited shi,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word.  It  has  been  supposed  by 
some  that,  as  the  Confessors  declared,  it  is  not  merely  pJiysical 
corruption,  but  moral  pollution,  involving  not  only  the  loiuer,  but 
the  liigher  powers  of  man;  that  it  is  the  mere  result  of  being  natur- 
ally efigeiidcred,  and  that  it  is  really  sin;  they  must  have  relied  much 
upon  the  Traducian  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  soul.  This  is  in- 
ferred partly  from  the  fact  that  this  theory  is  very  favorable  to  their 
doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  partly  from  the  fact  that  it  was  after- 
ward explicitly  adopted  by  the  Formula  of  Concord,  and  soon  became 
the  prevalent  theory  in  the  Lutheran  Church.  But  though  this  theory 
may  possibly  be  logically  involved  in  their  views  of  natural  de- 
pravity, I  doubt  whether  they  were  much  influenced  by  it,  or  by 
anything  except  their  deep  sense  of  sin  and  their  humble  submis- 
sion to  the  decisions  of  the  Word  of  God  regarding  the  character 
and  condition  of  fallen  man.  They  appeal  to  experience,  and,  in  the 
Apology,  challenge  their  opponents  to  show  them  in  all  history  a 
single  man  who  ever  dared  to  say  that  what  they  described  natural 
depravity  to  be,  viz.:  "  Want  of  fear  of  God,  etc.,"  was  not  sin,  but 
they  do  not  appeal  for  support  to  any  theory  of  the  origin  of  the 
soul.  Luther  was  a  Trichotomist,  as  well  as  a  Traductionist,  but  as. 
the  former  could  not  prevent  him  from  rejecting  the  conclusion  drawn- 
from  the  Trichotomy,  viz.,  that  only  the  corporeal  and  animal,  andf 
5 


54  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

not  the  spiritual,  was  affected  by  the  fall,  so  we  may  conclude 
that  he  was  not  influenced  by  the  latter  in  favor  of  the  Augustinian 
view  of  original  sin.  Besides,  we  are  told  on  good  authority  that 
he  was  unwilling  to  decide  the  question  between  the  Traductionists 
and  Creationists  of  the  day.  From  this  we  may  infer  that,  though 
the  Confessors  were  Traductionists,  they  were  not  influenced  by  the 
theory  as  were  many  Lutherans  at  a  later  day.  So  far  as  logical 
consequences  are  concerned,  there  is  indeed  a  great  difference  in  the 
bearings  of  the  several  hypotheses  concerning  the  origin  of  the  soul. 
The  theory  of  pre-existence,  regarding  corporeal  nature  as  a  prison- 
house  of  souls,  and  each  individual  body  as  a  prison-cell,  into  which 
an  individual  soul  has  descended  for  discipline,  is  obliged  to  say 
rather  that  sin  is  brought  by  the  soul  from  another  state  of  being, 
than  that  it  comes  by  propagation  of  the  body  from  the  first  man. 
Creationism,  recognizing  species  only  for  the  body  and  pure  indi- 
viduality for  the  soul — organic  connection  with  Adam  for  the  origin 
of  the  body,  but  pure  creation  for  that  of  the  soul — would  certainly, 
in  the  absence  of  any  other  considerations,  deny  that  natural  de- 
pravity is  really  sin.  From  the  early  Greek  fathers  down  to  our 
day,  those  who  rejected  this  doctrine  have  generally  been  believers 
in  the  theory  of  Pre-existence  or  that  of  Creation.  Augustine 
himself,  influenced  by  reason,  or  the  general  prevalence  of  Creation- 
ism, might  hesitate  to  reject  it;  and  Calvanistic,  more  readily  than 
Lutheran  believers  in  the  guilt  of  original  sin,  can  adopt  it — for  the 
former  have,  and  the  latter  have  not  relief  from  a  supposed  divine 
fore- ordination  of  sin  and  guilt  in  man.  Creationists  may,  consist- 
ently with  their  theory,  be  among  the  foremost  in  the  belief  of  the 
universality  and  the  depth  of  human  depravity,  nay,  be  led  by  the 
theory  to  peculiarly  strong  views  of  the  guilt  of  all  sin ;  but  to  the 
belief  of  inherited  sin,  in  the  sense  of  guilt,  they  must  be  led  by 
other  reasons  and  influences.  But  Traducianism,  regarding  all  souls 
as  present  in  the  human  nature,  held  in  the  person  of  Adam  when 
he  fell,  is,  by  logical  necessity,  led  to  the  conclusion  that  natural  de- 
pravity is  guilt.  If  all  souls  were  potentially  present,  then  when  he 
sinned  they  sinned;  and  as  the  sin  was  voluntary,  it  is  guilt.  Crea- 
tionism admits  z.  wr^fz'rt/^  connection ;  Traduction  affirms  dsv  imme- 
diate connection,  between  the  sinning  Adam  and  the  sinning 
human  family.  Creationism  does  not  deny  the  possibility,  or  even 
probability,  that  the  created   soul,  connected  with  the  propagated 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  55 

body,  may  sin  before  birth  ;  Traduction  affirms  the  absolute  certainty 
of  the  soul's  having  sinned  before  birth.  Creationism  may  be  led  by 
experience  and  the  Word  of  God  to  the  conclusion  that  natural  de- 
pravity, as  real  sin,  existed  in  us  before  our  birth;  Traduction,  in- 
dependently of  all  other  reasons,  would  infer  this.  Creationism  may 
admit  that  the  fall  of  Adam  has  produced  in  us  that  which  is  an 
invariable  occasion  of  our  being  born  with  a  depravity,  which  is 
really  sin ;  Traduction  positively  affirms  that  it  is  a  necessary  cause 
of  it,  that  it  has  introduced  not  only  an  occasion,  but  a  necessity,  of 
our  coming  into  being  sinful  and  guilty.  Creationism  may  admit  a 
natural  ability,  while  it  denies  any  moral  ability  in  the  human  soul 
to  avoid  sin — that  it  had  the  power  to  avoid  sin,  while  there  was  a 
moral  certainty  that  it  would  not;  Traduction  must  deny  both  nat- 
ural  and  moral  ability  to  every  human  being  naturally  engendered 
since  the  fall  of  Adam.  But  the  Confessors  rely  upon  no  theory, 
and  attempt  no  explanation ;  they  consult  conscience,  and  find  that 
this  depravity  is  really  sin.  They  listen  to  the  voice  of  experience, 
and  learn  that  it  has  been  their  sin  from  their  earliest  recollection, 
that  its  origin  was  prior  to  consciousness,  that  in  all  probability  they 
were  born  with  it — born  in  sin — born  sinful  and  guilty.  They  in- 
quire at  the  oracles  of  God,  and  they  think  they  hear  the  solemn 
response  :  "  You  were  shapen  in  iniquity,  and  in  sin  did  your  mother- 
conceive  you;"  and  they  state  the  awful  fact  of  universal  depravity 
and  universal  guilt — the  awful  fact :  "  That  since  the  fall  of  Adam, 
all  men  naturally  born  are  begotten  and  born  in  sin  ;  that  is,  that 
they  are,  from  the  first  moment  of  their  existence,  full  of  evil  desire 
and  propensity,  and  can,  by  nature,  have  no  true  fear  of  God,  no 
true  faith  in  God ;  and  that  this  inherent  disease  and  natural  de- 
pravity is  really  sin." 

4.  And  this  leads  us,  in  the  last  place,  to  consider  the  conse- 
quences of  this  natural  depravity.  Is  there  any  escape  from  this 
deplorable  condition?  The  Article  answers:  "It  still  condemns 
and  causes  eternal  death  to  all  those  who  are  not  born  again  of 
Baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  Pelagians  said:  If  man  sin,  he 
needs  only  the  guiding  light  of  truth,  and  the  motive  power  of  re- 
wards and  punishment  for  renovation;  while  his  honest  endeavors 
will  secure  the  help  of  divine  grace,  to  facilitate  the  work;  still  he 
is  saved,  not  by  the  merits  and  sufferings,  but  by  the  teaching  and 
example,  of  Christ.     The  Confessors  say:  "We  condemn  the  Pelag- 


56  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ians  and  others,  who  deny  that  original  corruption  is  sin,  and  who, 
to  the  disparagement  of  the  merits  and  sufferings  of  Christ,  allege 
that  man,  by  his  natural  abilities,  may  be  justified  before  God." 
These  others  were  the  Romanists.  In  the  Apology  stating  the 
Papal  doctrine,  that:  "Men  can  love  God  supremely,  and  keep  his 
commandments;"  they  ask  :  "  Is  not  this  to  have  original  righteous- 
ness ?  If  the  human  nature  have  such  great  powers  that  it  can,  of 
itself,  love  God  supremely,  what  has  become  of  original  sin  ?  For 
what  purpose  do  we  need  the  grace  of  Christ,  if  we  can  be  justified 
by  our  own  righteousness?  To  what  end  do  we  need  the  Holy 
Ghost,  if  the  human  powers  can,  of  themselves,  love  God  and  keep 
his  commandments?"  Man  is  lost,  unless  God  save  him;  he  can 
have  neither  merit  nor  strength  for  salvation  ;  deliverance  from  this 
state  is  entirely  by  divine  grace  and  by  divine  agency — entirely 
through  regeneration  by  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost — it  is  en- 
tirely monergistic.  The  Greek  Anthropology  said:  The  human 
will,  unaffected  by  the  fall,  can  begin  the  work  of  regeneration,  but 
on  account  of  the  hindrances  of  depravity,  it  needs  divine  grace  to 
complete  it ;  there  are  two  efficient  agencies ;  the  work  is  a  syner- 
gism. Pelagianism  said  :  Man  has  suffered  no  change  by  the  fall ; 
he  still  has  his  destiny  in  his  own  hands ;  man  is  the  only  efficient 
agent  necessary  in  the  production  of  holiness ;  salvation  is  mon- 
ergistic. The  Latin  Anthropology  said :  The  will  of  man  has,  by 
the  fall,  been  determined  to  evil  and  fixed  in  enmity  to  God ;  the 
work  of  regeneration  must,  therefore,  begin  by  divine  agency,  and, 
as  the  alienation  from  God,  and  the  hostility  to  God's  government, 
can  cease  only  with  the  completion  of  the  change,  there  can  be  no 
human  co-operation  ;  God  is  the  only  agent ;  man  but  the  passive 
subject;  there  is  complete  and  exclusive  monergism  in  human  sal- 
vation. The  Greek  Anthropology  revived  in  Semi-Pelagianism, 
and  speaking  by  the  mouth  of  Rome,  responded:  These  are  ex- 
tremes of  the  same  faith;  both  agencies,  the  human  and  the  divine, 
are  present,  are  inseparable  and  co-operative  in  the  beginning, 
middle,  and  end  of  the  work ;  grace  is  given  to  all,  but  it  is  effect- 
ual only  by  the  subject's  use  of  his  own  remaining  freedom  to  good. 
And  to  this,  the  Latin  Anthropology,  revived  at  the  Reformation, 
answers  in  the  Augsburg  Confession :  "  The  human  will  possesses 
some  liberty  for  the  performance  of  civil  duties,  and  the  choice  of 
those  things  lying  within  the  control  of  reason.     But  it  does  not 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  57 

possess  the  power,  without  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  be- 
ing just  before  God,  or  of  yielding  spiritual  obedience ;  for  the 
natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  which  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God; 
but  this  is  accomplished  in  the  heart,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received 
through  the  Word. 

For  regeneration,  the  Greek  fathers  look  to  divine  grace  and  to 
the  human  will;  Pelagius,  to  man  alone;  Augustine,  to  God  alone. 
In  connection  with  unconditional  election,  Augustinian  Monergism 
bids  us  wait  for  irresistible  grace;  with  conditional  election,  it 
bids  us  depend  on  grace,  dispensed  through  divinely  appomted 
means.  Predestinarian  Augustinianism  looks  for  ability,  as  the  ef- 
fect of  special  grace;  Lutheran  Augustinianism,  to  regenerating 
grace,  operating  through  the  Word  and  Sacraments.  But  as  Luth- 
eranism  teaches  that  grace  is  equally  resistible,  and  natural  de- 
pravity equally  powerful,  in  all  cases,  and  yet  that  some  men  do 
not,  and  others  do,  effectually  resist,  it  must  admit  some  kind  of 
agency  in  the  human  will.  As  the  difference  is  not  in  the  grace,  or 
in  the  depravity,  it  must  be  traced  to  some  act  of  the  will,  produc- 
tive or  receptive,  at  some  time  during  the  process,  and  before  its 
completion.  Thus  did  it  seem  to  stand  upon  a  precipice,  with  the 
alternative  of  letting  go  its  monergism,  or  being  drawn,  by  an  irre- 
sistible logic,  into  the  gulf  of  unconditional  election. 

The  Confessors  seemed  to  be  unconscious  of  this  difficulty;  not, 
I  think,  because  they  adopted  the  Augustinian  Predestination;  (for 
though,  in  their  early  writings,  and  in  the  fifth  Article  of  the  Confes- 
sion, they  show  it  some  favor;  yet,  in  another,  by  denying  the  doc- 
trine of  the  final  perseverance  of  the  saints,  they  break  a  necessary 
link  in  the  system ;)  but,  because — controlled  by  the  practical  as- 
pects of  the  truth — they  remanded  the  work  of  bringing  the  great 
facts  of  revelation  under  the  influence  of  the  logical  movement,  into 
a  system,  to  the  schools;  and,  as  matter  of  Confession  and  faith, 
present  these  facts  as  they  are  felt  in  experience,  and  received  by 
the  intuitions  of  the  reason,  rather  than  through  the  processes  of 
the  understanding.  But  the  difficulty  did  make  itself  felt  as  soon 
as  the  Calvinistic  and  Lutheran  systems  of  doctrine  began  to  be  de- 
veloped. When,  in  the  consequent  conflict  between  the  two,  the 
Calvinists  deduced  what  they  regarded  as  the  logical  consequences 
of  the  Augustinian  monergism,  Melanchthon,  and  with  him  a  great 
part  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  shuddering  before  the  awful  gulf  of 


58  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

unconditional  election,  and  endeavoring  to  escape  from  its  brink,  ac- 
corded "to  the  human  soul,  though  apostate,  an  appetency,  faint  and 
ineffectual,  yet  real  and  inalienable,  toward  the  spiritual  and  the 
holy."  "Three  things  concur  in  the  work  ;  the  Word  of  God,  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  the  human  will,  as  non-resisting  to  the  Word  of 
God."  Human  will  and  brute  will,  rational  agency  and  instinctive 
activity,  the  good  will,  or  the  will  as  holy,  and  the  will  merely  as  a 
faculty — the  one  lost,  the  other  incapable  of  being  lost,  without  the 
annihilation  of  the  man  himself;  the  will  as  a  power  to  think,  or  de- 
sire, or  do,  what  is  pleasing  to  God,  and  the  will  as  a  mode  of  ac- 
tivity, are  to  be  distinguished.  The  good  will  was  lost  by  the  fall, 
and  is  only  to  be  restored  by  divine  influence ;  but  the  will,  as  a 
faculty,  remains — as  a  capacity  to  accept  the  offered  gifts  of  grace. 
This,  at  one  blow,  broke  the  chain  of  predestinarian  consequences, 
drawn  from  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  original  sin.  But  it  was 
pronounced  synergistic,  and  was  most  decidedly  condemned  and  re- 
pudiated by  the  Formula  of  Concord;  the  leading  author  of  which 
said  that  the  sinner  had  only  the  same  kind  of  agency  in  his  regen- 
eration that  the  culprit  has  in  his  execution — he  must  be  tJicre  as 
the  subject  of  the  action.  His  illustration  of  the  power  of  man  to 
come  to  the  new  life,  is  given  in  the  supposed  words  of  a  thief,  who, 
on  the  way  to  the  gallows,  should  call  to  the  people,  running  before 
him  to  the  place  of  execution :  "  Not  so  fast,  good  people — don't 
run  ahead  of  me — if  I  am  to  be  hanged,  I  shall  have  to  be  there." 
The  Formula  of  Concord  declares,  that  since  the  fall,  there  is  not 
left  in  man  a  spark  of  spiritual  power.  The  will,  by  nature,  is  free 
only  to  rebel  against  God,  and  is  as  incapable  of  all  good  as  a  hard 
stone,  or  block,  or  wild  beast;  yea,  worse  than  a  block,  for  that  can- 
not resist.  Man  has  only  a  passive  capacity  to  be  regenerated ;  and 
regeneration  itself  is  a  literal  resurrection  from  spiritual  death. 
Thus  was  developed  the  Ecclesiastical  system — a  step  beyond  the 
practical  position  of  the  Confession;  its  authors  placing  themselves 
systematically  upon  Monergistic  ground;  consciously  rejecting  the 
Augustinian  predestinarianism ;  and  yet,  theoretically  and  tena- 
ciously, clinging  to  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  original  sin.  Even 
the  theory  of  the  Traducian  origin  of  the  soul  is  affirmed.  No 
wonder  that  Spener  denied  the  binding  authority  of  this  Symbol, 
and  felt  it  necessary  to  say  that  even  when  it  had  been  received,  it 
was  not  made  binding  in  all  respects. 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  59 

But  how  did  it  relieve  itself  from  the  consciousness  of  the  claims 
of  unconditional  election  and  irresistible  grace?  It  relied  upon  the 
efficacy  of  grace,  regenerating  non-resisting  subjects  in  baptism. 
All  who  had  been  baptized  in  infancy  (and  nearly  all  with  whom  it 
dealt  were)  belonged  to  this  class.  All  such — the  work  of  regen- 
eration, in  which  God  alone  operates,  being  completed — can  co- 
operate. For  all  such  there  is  the  power  of  synergism.  They  are 
no  longer  merely  passive,  but  can  act,  in  the  use  of  powers  be- 
stowed in  regeneration.  They  are  regenerate,  though  not  renewed; 
children  of  God  and  heirs  of  salvation,  though  not  converted.  For 
the  system  distinguished  between  regeneration  and  conversion.  In 
regeneration  man  is  entirely  passive ;  in  conversion  he  is  entirely  ac- 
tive. In  regeneration  God  bestows  powers ;  in  renovation  man  uses 
the  powers  thus  bestowed.  Man  must  be  regenerated  before  he  can 
be  converted.  Even  the  conversion  of  those  who  have  fallen  after 
baptism  is  a  revival  of  the  life  communicated  in  baptism,  for  if  it  had 
ever  been  lost  they  could  not  have  been  converted.  If  renewed,  and 
when  renewed,  after  a  life  of  deliberate  sin,  the  conversion  of  men 
must  be  regarded  not  as  the  beginning  de  novo  of  the  divine  life  in 
the  soul,  but  only  an  awakening  of  the  spiritual  life  bestowed  in 
baptism,  and  which  had  never  been  suspended.  "  That  awakening 
which  occurs  when  life  is  restored  after  sickness,  a  swoon,  or  appa- 
rent death,"  says  Dr.  J.  H.  Kurtz,  one  of  the  great  leaders  of  the 
modern  movement  to  revive  the  Ecclesiastical  system,  "  cannot  be 
mistaken  for  the  bodily  birth  with  which  the  operations  of  life  com- 
mence ;  as  little  ought  regeneration  to  be  confounded  with  a  spiritual 
awakening.  When  that  communion  with  the  Lord,  which  was 
established  in  baptism,  is  not  maintained  and  continually  renewed  by 
means  of  appropriate  spiritual  care  and  sustenance,  a  spiritual  state 
ensues  which  corresponds  to  bodily  sleep,  a  swoon,  or  apparent 
bodily  death.  *  *  The  recovery  of  an  individual  from  such  a 
death-like  sleep  through  the  illumination  and  calling  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  termed  his  awakening,"  Notwithstanding  the  absence  of  all 
the  signs  of  life  and  the  presence  of  all  the  marks  of  death,  the 
lapse  of  many  years  of  impenitence,  and  the  commission  of  multi- 
tudes of  wilful  sins,  the  awakening  must  be  considered  as  but  the 
revival  of  a  life  infused  in  baptism.  When  the  life  infused  in  baptism 
terminates,  according  to  Dr.  J.  H.  Kurtz,  "  it  terminates  in  actual  or 
eternal   death."     Once   lost,  it   is   never   restored.     But  this   same 


60  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Ecclesiastical  system  resisted  the  doctrine  of  the  "Terminus,"  or  that 
the  day  of  grace  may  end  before  the  termination  of  life,  and  taught 
that  it  extends  to  the  moment  of  death,  so  that  the  person  regener- 
ated in  baptism,  though  always  impenitent,  never  forfeits  the  claims 
or  loses  the  powers  bestowed  in  regeneration  while  life  lasts ;  is 
always  in  a  state  of  justification,  though  impenitent,  and  may  at  any 
moment,  up  to  the  brink  of  eternity,  repent  and  make  good  his  title 
to  eternal  life. 

The  Symbolists  (for  this  is  a  proper  designation,  as  the  supporters 
of  this  system  laid  exclusive  claim  to  the  merit  of  attachment  to, 
and  consistency  with,  the  Symbols — I  shall  say,  therefore,  for 
brevity's  sake,  the  Symbolists)  made  this  theory  the  ground  of  their 
practice  in  dealing  with  their  hearers.  On  this  ground  they  called 
upon  them  to  live  to  the  glory  of  God,  and  to  use  the  powers  be- 
stowed on  them  in  regeneration  at  their  baptism  for  their  spiritual 
renewal,  and  included  in  this  number  of  the  regenerate  the  most 
gross  and  habitual  sinners.  Thus  Newmeister,  one  of  the  twenty- 
seven  out  of  thirty  ministers  of  Hamburg  who  were  champions  of 
Symbolism,  against  Spener,  in  his  sermons  on  "  The  New  Man," 
addressed  to  the  people  for  the  express  purpose  of  guarding  them 
against  that  departure  from  orthodoxy  with  which  he  charges  the 
Pietists,  and  with  manifest  desire  to  be  very  careful  in  his  statements, 
says  :  "  The  new  (regenerated)  man  is  called  spirit,  both  because  the 
Spirit  of  God  dwells  in  him,  and  also  because  he  has  obtained  from 
him  spiritual  powers,  so  that  he  can  believe  and  live  in  a  manner 
well-pleasing  to  God  and  suitable  to  his  eternal  salvation.  A  re- 
generated believer  co-operates  in  the  work  of  renewal,  co-operates 
in  that  holiness  and  righteousness  which  he  is  to  let  shine  before 
men ;  there  is  consequently  a  great  difference  between  renewal  and 
regeneration,  together  with  justification.  As  in  justification,  so  in 
regeneration,  man  does  nothing  at  all ;  this  is  wholly  God's  work 
alone.  But  as  man  receives  powers  in  regeneration,  when  he  ap- 
plies these  powers  in  his  renewal  he  co-operates,  though  in  much 
weakness  and  imperfection.  This  is  clearly  taught  in  the  Symbol- 
ical Books,  especially  in  Article  III.  of  the  Formula  of  Concord, 
according  to  the  sacred  Scriptures."  And  on  the  next  page,  in  the 
application  of  the  same  sermon,  he  says  :  "  Ardently  do  I  beseech 
you,  one  and  all  (for  one  and  all  of  you  became  new  creatures  in 
baptism),  that  ye  now  examine  how  ye  have  used  the  powers  be- 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  6l 

stowed  upon  you."  Continuing  to  address  these  same  persons, 
whom  he  had  just  declared  to  be  new  creatures,  he  describes  them 
as  persons  "  walking  in  lasciviousness,  lusts,  excess  of  wine,  revel- 
lings,  banqueting  and  abominable  idolatries."  They,  according  to  the 
symbolistic  system,  were  not  renewed,  but  still  they  were  regener- 
ated, and  consequently  they  could  act.  Though  a  strenuous  mon- 
ergist,  and  zealous  in  warning  against  the  idea  that  an  unregenerated 
man  can  be  anything  else  than  passive,  these  drunken  and  lascivious 
and  idolatrous  men  he  could  properly  urge  to  action,  because  they 
were  regenerated  men;  the  work,  in  which  God  is  the  only  efficient, 
was  completed;  and  now,  in  their  renewal,  they  could  co-operate. 
Consistently,  therefore,  does  he  exhort  them  not  to  seek  Christ  for 
justification,  or  the  Holy  Ghost  for  regeneration;  but  that  they,  as 
justified  and  regenerated  men,  should  *' no  longer  live,  the  rest  of 
their  time,  in  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  but  to  the  will  of  God."  And 
this  doctrine,  he  tells  us,  contrasts  favorably  with  Calvinism,  which 
makes  baptism  only  an  empty  sign,  and  distinguishes  it  from  re- 
generation, just  as  if  the  latter  were  not  wrought  through  the 
former,  and  as  if  a  man  were  not  really  made  a  new  creature  in  bap- 
tism, unless  he  had,  by  an  absolute  decree  of  God,  been  predestined 
to  salvation. 

Thus  were  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  systems  rivals,  for  the 
honor  of  consistent  monergism,  and  of  having  the  best  method  of 
meeting  the  difficulties  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  original  sin, 
for  the  comfort  of  saints  and  the  conversion  of  sinners.  And  thus 
did  symbolistic  Lutheranism  apparently  relieve  itself  from  the  par- 
alysis of  the  doctrine  of  man's  perfect  passiveness  in  his  regenera- 
tion. But  it  was  a  delusion,  leading  only  to  false  activity  and 
groundless  hopes.  The  Pietists  said  it  was  a  covert  Pelagianism. 
It  had  certainly  even  more  power  to  flatter  and  deceive  itself  with 
delusive  hopes.  For  it  had  an  outward  and  divine  pledge,  for  all 
who  trusted  in  it;  while  Pelagianism  had  only  an  inward  and  human 
ground  of  power  to  hope  for  a  future  and  a  death-bed  conversion. 
Spcner  deplored  the  effects  of  it,  as  little  better  than  those  of  the 
Y>^^?i\  opus  operation.  And  it  was  a  departure  from  original  and 
true  Lutheranism.  For  Symbolism  connects  justification  with  re- 
generation, in  which  there  are  implanted  only  the  powers  for  re- 
newal: Luther  makes  it  inseparable  from  a  radical,  inner  change. 
Symbolism  connects  regeneration  with  the  mere  implantation  of  the 


62  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

power  to  believe;  Luther  makes  it  inseparable  from  a  living  faith 
— a  faith  which,  while  it  does  not  justify,  because  of  the  love  with 
which  it  works,  is  notwithstanding  a  loving  embrace  of  Christ. 
Symbolism  said,  faith,  in  regeneration,  is  present  only  potentially; 
Luther  and  the  Confessors,  that  it  is  present  in  reality  and  in  action  ; 
and  this  they  held  to  be  the  case,  even  in  the  regeneration  of  chil- 
dren, in  baptism.  Symbolism  places  regeneration  before  mortifica- 
tion: Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  puts  mortification,  in  the  sense 
of  contrition,  before  vivification,  in  the  sense  of  consolation.  Sym- 
bolism disconnects  the  idea  of  Justification  from  our  sense  of  for- 
giveness ;  Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  connects  it  with  the  sub- 
jective application  of  forgiveness,  or  the  refreshing  and  enlivening 
of  the  heart  and  conscience.  According  to  Symbolism,  the  putting 
off  of  the  old  man  is  distinct  from  regeneration,  is  subsequent  to  it; 
but  according  to  Luther,  while  the  real  victory  over  sin,  and  the 
principal  expulsion  of  it,  does  not  precede  the  beginning  of  faith  in 
regeneration  ;  yet  that  faith  which  accepts  the  terms  of  salvation, 
and  brings  Christ  into  the  heart,  is  possible  to  those  only,  whose 
hearts  have  before  been  broken  and  made  contrite  by  the  terms  of 
the  law,  yea,  have  tasted  condemnation  and  death,  in  this  experi^ 
ence.  So  Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  does  not  limit  the  term 
regeneration  to  that  part  of  the  great  spiritual  change  which,  in  the 
Symbolistic  system,  is  made  to  monopolize  it ;  but  extends  it  to  the 
conversion  and  quickening,  which  occur  afterwards,  in  the  course  of 
repentance. 

The  Ecclesiastical  system  was  intended  to  afford  a  reason  for  that 
activity,  in  the  work  of  personal  religion,  which  all  feel  that  con- 
science and  the  Bible  require.  As  we  cannot  adopt  this,  let  us  ask 
what  it  was  that,  with  their  views  of  the  relative  guilt  and  utter  im- 
potency  of  man,  enabled  the  Confessors  to  be  so  intensely  active 
themselves,  and  to  preach  so  confidently  to  others,  "  repentance  to- 
ward God  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  It  was,  first,  the 
practical  state  of  religion  in  which  they  were.  The  revival  in  which 
the  Reformation  was  born  led  them,  in  its  early  years,  to  deal  mainly 
with  the  practical  aspects  of  truth,  to  depreciate  scholasticism,  and 
to  keep  in  check  that  process  of  the  understanding  which  can  never 
be  satisfied  without  a  logical  form  for  all  truth,  and  which,  too,  at- 
tempts to  bring  within  grasp  of  logical  statement,  truths  too  high 
for  its  reach,  and   too  spiritual   for  the  cold  clutches  of  its  logic. 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  6^ 

Content  with  the  facts,  as  they  He  in  consciousness  and  are  revealed 
in  the  popular  expressions  of  the  Bible,  they  could  receive  and  teach 
truths  which,  to  the  mere  logical  understanding,  are  irreconcilable, 
and  keep  the  deepest  feeling  of  impotency  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  most  intense  activity.  Truths,  liquid  in  the  fervor  of  religious 
feeling,  flow  into  each,  while  separated  and  put  into  the  cold  forms 
of  logic,  their  inner  connection,  the  bond  of  their  real  union, 
the  point  at  which  they  are  in  harmony,  is  unseen.  Every  Chris- 
tian's history,  and  every  revival  of  religion,  affords  instances  of 
the  power  of  experience  to  reconcile  apparently  conflicting  truths 
in  religion;  of  the  power  of  a  practical  interest  in  religion  to 
cause  a  man  to  realize  that  God  alone  can  change  his  heart; 
and  yet  to  lead  him  to  labor  as  if  the  whole  work  depended 
upon  himself  The  doctrine  of  this  Article,  therefore,  will  be  ap- 
propriated by  men  very  much  according  to  the  state  of  religion,  and 
will  always  be  accepted  in  a  revived  Christianity.  The  second 
reason  was,  the  presence  of  a  true  Christian  mysticism — that  mys- 
ticism which,  in  all  its  speculative  activity,  relies  more  upon  the 
insight  of  reason  and  the  intuition  of  facts,  than  upon  the  logi- 
cal understanding  and  the  connections  of  abstract  reasoning. 
Luther  had  the  dialectics  of  Augustine  imbued  with  the  my.sticism 
of  the  New  Testament.  Spener  says :  "  That,  as  he  found  much 
more  that  was  powerful  and  striving  to  the  heart,  in  the  Mystical 
than  in  the  Scholastic  theology,  Luther  was  indebted,  and  ac- 
knowledged his  indebtedness  to  Tauler,  and  the  like  mystical 
writers,  more  than  to  any  other  teachers;  yea,  those  who  are  not 
entirely  inexperienced  in  these  things,  and  who  will  read  especially 
Luther's  earlier  writings,  in  which  God  laid  tJic  pruicipal  pozucr  of 
the  Rcfoniiation  will  see  that  he  speaks  so  often  in  the  style  of  the 
Mystics,  has  so  absorbed  them  in  his  own  person,  and  changed 
them  into  his  own  spiritual  life  and  power,  that  he  often  quotes 
from  them  when  he  does  not  at  all  think  of  it."  This  tendency 
always  checks  that  scientific  spirit,  falsely  so-called,  which  must 
always  have  in  Religion,  as  in  Nature,  a  system — a  form — a  creed, 
and  which,  incapable  of  appreciating  the  Biblical  method  of  at  once 
exhibiting  truth  to  all  the  capacities  of  man,  is  in  danger  of  attempt- 
ing to  bring  the  boundless  domain  of  the  scheme  of  redemption 
within  its  own  narrow  limits,  and  of  becoming  impatient  and  tyran- 
nical, in  its  requirement  of  unity  and  system  in  truths  whose  real 


64  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

connections  can  only  be  realized  through  experience,  and  whose 
inner  relations  can  be  comprehended  only  by  a  theology  which  be- 
gins its  superstructure  only  upon  the  facts  in  Christian  conscious- 
ness, and  attempts  to  build  only  as  it  can  work  in  the  light  of  rev- 
elation and  experience. 

So  when  the  Ecclesiastical  system  had  culminated  in  an  ortho- 
doxy which  had  dispensed  with  an  earnest  insisting  upon  an  actual 
inner  change;  yea,  regarded  zeal  for  it  with  the  suspicion  of  heresy, 
and  denounced  as  unfaithful  to  Lutheranism  those  who  could  not 
believe  that  regeneration  can  exist  without  a  real  spiritual  renewal; 
Arndt,  influenced  by  the  same  Christian  mysticism,  which  operated 
so  powerfully  in  Luther,  felt  called  to  teach  anew,  what  he  called 
"the  principal  and  inmost  part  of  theology" — an  experimental 
change  of  heart.  Thus  would  he  lead  baptized  Christians  to  an 
actual  regeneration.  For  though  he  acknowledges,  that  even  the 
most  rebellious  sinners,  who  had  been  baptized  in  infancy,  were  in- 
grafted into  Christ;  yet  he  takes  care  to  say  also,  that,  "as  they 
have  not  grown  in  him,  through  a  new  life,  it  is  manifest  that  they 
are  broken  off  again,  and  are  cut  off  like  dry  branches." 

In  like  manner,  Spener,  seeing  that  the  Ecclesiastical  system 
preached  Justification  without  exhibiting  the  power  of  a  justifying 
faith,  felt  himself  called  to  the  work  of  insisting  upon  that  spiritual 
illumination — that  living  faith,  which  utterly  changes  the  character 
of  man.  In  doing  this,  he  said  so  much  about  an  active  faith — -fidcni 
operosavi — as  Arndt  had  called  it,  that  he  was  charged  by  Symbol- 
ists, on  every  hand,  with  Synergism,  yea,  with  Pelagianism.  But  he 
cared  not  for  this,  but  insisted  that  love  contributed  to  faith — was 
an  element  of  saving  faith — though  not  a  justifying  element,  and, 
as  love  is  a  most  intensely  active  element,  he  seemed  to  teach  a 
Synergism ;  and  yet  he  evidently  held  the  Monergism  of  this 
Article  of  the  Confession ;  and  equally  evident  is  it  that  the  effect 
of  his  method  was  to  save  it  from  the  destructive  influence  of  that 
which  laid  exclusive  claim  to  consistency  with  it.  Hagenbach 
says  that  the  Pietists  kept  alive  "the  conviction  of  sin  and  moral 
impotency,"  when  the  definitions  of  the  schools  had  rendered  it  a 
dead  letter.  While  Spener  regarded  the  conversion  of  Christians 
who  had  fallen  into  spiritual  death  as  a  return  to  Baptismal  grace, 
yet  he  calls  such  conversion  explicitly  and  emphatically  a  new  re- 
generation, inasmuch  as  the  Baptismal  regeneration  had  been  en- 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  65 

tirely  lost;  and  regarding  this  as  the  condition  of  the  vast  majority 
of  those  baptized  in  infancy,  he  treated  all  who  did  not  exhibit  the 
evidences  of  spiritual  life  as  not  only  unconverted,  but  unregenerate. 
He  explicitly  states  and  argues  this  point,  showing  the  absurdity  of 
the  presence  of  life  in  the  midst  of  nothing  but  the  marks  of  death. 
It  was  the  revival  of  the  early  Lutheran  method.  "  In  the  case  of 
Spener,  as  in  the  case  of  Luther,"  says  Hagenbach  :  "it  was  experi- 
ence which  led  him  to  the  knowledge  of  sin,  and  moulded  his  views 
concerning  its  nature.  Thus  it  happened,  that  in  his  system,  sin  and 
penance  are  closely  connected  with  each  other.  He  does  not  wait  till 
his  views  of  sin  become  cold  and  indifferent,  but  he  strikes,  as  it  were, 
the  iron  made  red-hot  in  the  furnace  of  inward  experience,  while  it 
yet  retains  all  its  heat."  As  Luther  returned  to  primitive  Christi- 
anity, so  did  Spener  return  to  early  Lutheranism.  I  consider  him  as 
not  only  the  second  great  Reformer  of  the  Church,  but  also  the 
father  of  the  American  Lutheran  theology;  and,  hence,  I  have 
dwelt  upon  the  true  method  of  appropriating  the  Article,  which 
found  its  full  enunciation  in  his  works. 

The  method  of  Spener,  based  upon  the  maxim  :  "  That  personal 
experience  must  precede  all  true  knowledge  of  the  truths  of  Reve- 
lation ;  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  must  be  felt  in  order  to  be 
rightly  apprehended  by  the  understanding  ;  "  has,  by  the  process  of 
psychological  discoveries  been  proved  to  be  as  correct  philosophi- 
cally, as  it  is  practically  important;  that  it  is,  indeed,  the  only  true 
ground  of  theological  science.  So  also,  his  method  of  Ecclesiasti- 
cal union  and  discipline — based  upon  the  idea  that  the  whole  of  re- 
vealed truth  can  never  be  embraced  in  the  logical  formulas  of  men, 
and  that,  consequently,  we  must  make  no  human  creed  the  measure 
of  our  faith  or  profession  ;  that  we  should  go  first  to  the  Bible,  then 
to  the  creed ;  try  the  creed  by  the  truths  first  drawn  from  the 
Bible,  and  not  the  Biblical  system  by  the  Ecclesiastical  dogma  ; 
subscribe  the  creed,  not  per  quia  but  per  quatenus — this  method 
has,  in  the  course  of  Ecclesiastical  history,  been  approved  by  the 
voice  of  Providence,  as  the  only  true  method  of  preserving  the  unity 
of  the  Church  against  the  divergent  forces,  and  the  fundamental 
truths  of  Christianity,  against  the  skeptical  tendencies,  of  human 
nature.  And  paradoxical  as  it  seemed  then,  and  seems  to  many 
now,  it  has  not  chilled  church  feeling,  nor  checked  scientific  acti- 
vity among  Christians :  but,  while  it  has  supplanted  the  old  Eccles- 


66  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

iastical  system,  and  introduced  a  new  method  into  the  entire  course 
of  theological  study,  it  has,  at  the  same  time,  excited  a  more  intense 
longing  for  the  speculative  apprehension  of  the  scriptural  idea  of  the 
Church,  and  a  more  persevering  effort  for  true  science  in  theology. 
And  the  general  result  is,  that  in  the  course  of  the  study,  since 
that  day,  of  the  contents  of  this  Article,  the  facts  of  sin  and  respon- 
sibility, of  moral  impotency  and  freedom  of  will,  of  organic  necessity 
and  personal  liberty,  generic  condition  and  individual  activity,  are 
no  longer  in  unconsciousness,  as  in  the  early  age  of  the  Church  ; 
nor  in  antagonism,  as  in  the  intervening  period.  The  two  sides  of 
the  nature  and  condition  of  the  individual — as,  in  his  rational  nature 
and  spiritual  relations,  free,  and  yet  in  bondage  from  his  birth  to  sin 
and  guilt,  by  his  sensuous  condition  and  his  unavoidable  relations 
to  the  race — the  generic  sinfulness,  and  the  free  activity ;  race  de- 
termination, and  individual  influence,  are  gradually  being  recognized, 
more  and  more,  as  only  the  two  sides  of  one  and  the  same  condi- 
tion and  activity.  As  idealism  and  sensationalism,  long  irreconcil- 
able positions  in  psychology,  were  first  both  accepted  as  facts  after 
men  began  to  heed  the  voice  of  experience,  and  are  now  being,  more 
and  more,  demonstrated  by  science  to  be  both  true,  and  in  harmony 
with  each  other,  and  as  but  the  two  sides  of  the  same  subject;  so 
after  men  had  suspended  the  scientific  operation  of  connection  suffi- 
ciently to  consult,  according  to  Spener's  method,  the  dictates  of  ex- 
perience in  Christian  consciousness — had  sufficiently  freed  them- 
selves from  the  tyranny  of  the  theological  dogma,  and  the  inflexible 
constraint  of  the  creed,  to  be  able  to  listen  to  the  plain  declarations 
of  the  Bible — then  the  facts,  that  we  are  sinful  from  our  earliest  be- 
ing, and  yet  responsible ;  in  bondage  by  our  relations  to  the  race,  and 
yet  in  possession  of  personal  liberty  ;  enslaved  by  sin,  and  yet  capa- 
ble of  activity,  in  view  of  motives  presented  by  the  gospel,  and  urged 
by  conscience — began  to  be  found  both  true,  and  neither  exclusive 
of  the  other.  The  great  facts  of  inborn  depravity  and  personal  re- 
sponsibility, of  native  impotence  and  possible  activity,  in  view  of  the 
offers,  and  under  the  influence  of  divine  grace,  are,  more  and  more, 
felt  to  be  in  perfect  harmony.  And  the  theological  mind  of  Chris- 
tendom is  beginning,  with  some  success,  to  put  into  systematic  con- 
nection, what  has  long  ago  hQ&n  felt  to  be  in  harmony.  It  is  not,  in- 
deed, a  connection  of  the  logical  understanding,  but  rather  an  intui- 
tion of  the  reality  of  a  harmonious  connection,  between  the  offer  of 


ORIGINAL    SIN.  6/ 

mercy  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  capacity  to  receive  on  the  other;  be- 
tween the  command  to  repent  and  the  power  to  obey,  produced  partly 
by  the  force  of  the  command  itself,  in  deepening,  through  the  experi- 
ence involved,  the  sense  of  the  need  of  divine  help;  and  partly  by 
the  superadded  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit — the  philosophy  of  the 
adage  of  Augustine:  lUe  facit,  iitfaciavms. 

Finally,  it  has  learned  that,  though  our  liberty  is  limited — limited 
by  God,  limited  by  organic  nature,  limited  by  original  sin,  limited 
by  acquired  character;  yet  it  is  real — that  holiness,  in  the  sense  in 
which  the  Bible  presents  and  conscience  requires  it,  is  unattainable 
by  the  unaided  powers  of  man  ;  that,  if  men  are  saved  at  all,  they 
must  be  saved  by  grace,  through  faith,  and  that  a  faith  which  they 
cannot  produce,  but  can  only  receive ;  that  in  regeneration,  they  do 
not  bring  themselves  to  God,  but  only  yield  to  God's  drawing ;  and 
yet  that  this  act,  though  not  productive,  but  only  receptive,  is  still 
an  act,  and  though  a  yielding  act,  it  is  still  a  real  act ;  and  that 
though  God  is  the  only  efficient  agent,  man  is  not  entirely  passive 
or  inactive,  in  his  repentance.  Thus  is  the  work  still  a  monergism, 
and  the  fundamental  truth  of  the  Article  remains,  teaching  us  that 
God  produces  all  in  the  change,  and  that  we  act  it  all ;  admonishing 
us  to  work  out  our  own  salvation  with  fear  and  with  trembling, 
since  it  is  God  himself  who,  of  his  own  good  pleasure,  worketh  in 
us,  both  to  will  and  to  do,  and  commanding  us,  confidently,  to  use 
all  the  means  of  grace,  but  to  be  satisfied  with  no  idea  of  a  justifica- 
tion, and  a  regeneration,  as  saving  us  from  the  sin  which  "  still  con- 
demns and  causes  eternal  death,"  which  is  not  connected  with  scrip- 
tural evidence  of  an  actual  inner  change  from  sin  to  holiness,  from 
spiritual  death  to  spiritual  life. 


ARTICLE  III. 


THE  PERSON  AND  WORK 
OF  CHRIST. 

By  S.  S.  SCHMUCKER,  D.  D. 


"  They  likewise  teach,  that  the  Word,  that  is,  the  Son  of  God,  assumed  hu- 
man nature,  in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  so  that  there  are  two 
natures,  human  and  divine,  inseparably  united  in  unity  of  person,  one  Christ, 
true  God  and  true  man,  who  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary;  who  truly  suffered, 
was  crucified,  died  and  was  buried,  that  he  might  reconcile  the  Father  to  us, 
and  be  a  sacrifice  not  only  for  original  sin,  but  also  for  all  actual  sins  of  men. 
The  same  descended  into  hell  and  truly  rose  again  the  third  day ;  then  ascended 
to  heaven,  that  he  might  sit  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  might  reign  forever 
over  all  creatures,  and  might  sanctify  those  who  believe  in  him,  by  sending 
into  their  hearts  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  may  govern,  console,  quicken,  and  defend 
them  against  the  devil  and  the  power  of  sin.  The  same  Christ  will  return 
again  openly,  that  he  may  judge  the  living  and  the  dead,  etc.,  according  to  the 
Apostles'  Creed." 

Introductory  Observations. 

IN  all  discussions  aiming  at  conviction,  it  is  necessary  to  ascer- 
tain what  points  we  may  assume  as  conceded;  for  if  our  prem- 
ises are  disputed,  the  vahdity  of  our  conclusions  will,  of  course, 
be  denied.  On  the  present  occasion,  we  may  assume,  that  our 
hearers  are  professed  Christians,  who  regard  the  Bible  as  a  revela- 
tion from  God,  and  consider  all  men  under  obligation  to  receive  it 
as  their  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  Hence,  although 
in  the  history  of  Christianity  its  professors  have,  at  different  periods, 
and  for  various  purposes,  deemed  it  proper  to  make  certain  careful, 

68 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  69 

systematic  statements  of  its  principal  doctrines,  and  termed  them 
Confessions  or  Creeds,  it  has  been  with  the  pre-supposition,  that 
these  doctrines  are  taught  in  the  Scriptures;  and  if  the  contrary  can 
be  estabhshed  concerning  any  Article,  it  has  confessedly  no  binding 
authority.  Thus  in  expounding  the  Augsburg  Confession,  it  is  to 
be  done  in  the  light  of  the  Bible,  its  positions  must  be  proved  by 
the  authority  of  the  Bible,  and  if  doubts  arise  in  regard  to  any 
topics,  they  must  be  tested  by  the  declarations  of  the  Bible. 

The  most  important  Confessions  of  this  kind,  in  the  history  of 
Christianity,  are  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Niceno-Constan- 
tinopolitan  and  the  Athanasian  Creeds,  together  with  the  decisions 
of  the  Councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  in  regard  to  the  person 
of  Christ.  The  Creed  of  greatest  moment  in  Protestantism,  is  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  first  and  sec- 
ond Articles  of  this  venerable  document,  the  mother  Confession  of 
Protestantism,  have  been  the  subjects  of  discussion  in  this  series  of 
Lectures,  and  the  third  invites  our  attention  on  the  present  occasion. 

This  Article  discusses  the  Incarnation,  the  Christology  and  So- 
teriology  of  the  Confession,  or,  the  place  which  is  assigned  in  it  to 
the  Son  of  God,  the  Messiah  or  Christ,  and  his  Work  of  Redemption. 

The  aiithorslup  of  this  Article,  like  that  of  the  Confession  in  gen- 
eral, belongs  to  the  illustrious  scholar  of  the  Reformation,  whose 
finished  productions  secured  him  the  title  of  the  Preceptor  of  Ger- 
many, and  not  the  authorship  of  its  Latin  original  alone,  but  also 
of  the  German,""  which  was  gradually  elaborated  and  amended  with 
the  Latin  at  Augsburg,  so  that  it  also  may  be  regarded  as  an  orig- 
inal. P^or  although  the  Torgau  Articles  of  Luther,  and  other  doc- 
uments, were  the  basis  out  of  which  Melanchthon,  in  concurrence 
with  other  theologians  at  Augsburg,  constructed  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  they  were  unrestricted  as  to  the  changes,  as  well  in  the 
German  as  in  the  Latin,  some  of  the  amendments  having  been  sug- 
gested by  the  princes  and  jurists  in  attendance,  especially  by  Chan- 
cellor Briick. 

The  Reformation  had  been  in  progress  thirteen  years  before  this 
Confession  was  delivered  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg,  on  the  25th  of 
June,  1530,  at  three  o'clock  p.  m.  During  this  time  the  study  of 
God's  word  had  revealed  to  the  Reformers  and  their  adherents,  the 


*See  abundant  proof  of  this  fact  in  KoUner's  Symbolik,  Vol.  I.,  p.  172-179. 
6 


JO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

greater  part  of  the  corruptions,  both  doctrinal  and  practical,  which 
had  destroyed  the  purity  and  evangelical  character  of  the  Church 
of  Rome.  Purer  views  of  the  plan  of  salvation  were  disseminated, 
and  a  large  portion  of  German}^  had  embraced  those  doctrines 
of  grace,  which  fill  the  soul  with  joy  and  gladness  through  this 
life,  and  with  the  full  assurance  of  eternal  blessedness  in  the  life  to 
come. 

The  immediate  occasion  of  this  Confession  was  the  announce- 
ment of  the  Emperor  Charles  V.,  that  he  would  convene  a  Diet  at 
Augsburg,  in  order,  among  other  things,  to  settle  the  religious  dis- 
putes which  had  distracted  the  land  :  adding  that  all  parties  should 
appear,  and  that  all  would  be  kindly  heard  and  impartially  judged. 
On  this  summons  the  Elector  of  Saxony  (John)  directed  his  theo- 
logians at  Wittenberg,  Luther,  Melanchthon,  Justus  Jonas  and 
Bugenhagen,  to  prepare  a  doctrinal  statement,  and  to  see  well  to  it 
that  its  positions  should  be  fully  supported  by  proof,  so  that  no  one 
could  improve  it.  They  were  also  requested  to  bring  it  finished  to 
Torgau,  by  the  20th  of  March,  which  was  accordingly  done.  The 
Emperor,  however,  delayed  his  arrival  more  than  two  months,  dur- 
ing which  time  Melanchthon,  in  concert  with  the  other  theologians, 
&c.,  assembled  at  Augsburg,  changed  and  enlarged  it  into  the  pre- 
sent Augsburg  Confession.  To  this  the  sanction  of  Luther  was 
also  obtained. 

As  the  circumstances  attending  the  preparation  and  delivery  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession  made  its  character  throughout  apologetic, 
so  the  name  by  which  it  was  first  designated,  by  both  Melanchthon 
and  Luther,  was  not  the  Confession,  but  the  Augsburg  Apology. 
Its  object  was  to  vindicate  the  Protestants,  by  showing  that  they 
did  not  differ  from  the  Romish  Church  as  much  as  their  enemies 
alleged,  not  so  much  as  to  render  them  unworthy  of  toleration  by 
the  imperial  government.  In  short,  the  design  of  the  Apology  was 
to  produce  the  conviction  in  the  Diet,  that  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures and  the  teachings  of  the  ancient  Church  universal.  Protestantism 
was  legitimately  entitled  to  ecclesiastical  existence  and  protection.  It 
was,  therefore,  by  no  means  the  design  of  Melanchthon,  or  of  those 
represented  by  the  Confession,  to  sever  themselves  from  historical 
connection  with  the  Church  of  former  ages.  He  admitted  that  the 
essential  doctrines  were  still  inculcated  in  the  Church  from  which 
they  had  separated  ;  but  maintained  that  both  her  dogma  and  cul- 


PERSON    AND    WORK   OF    CHRIST.  7 1 

tus  were  so  radically  corrupt,  as  absolutely  to  require  purification. 
Instead  of  breaking  loose  from  the  Church  of  the  past,  the  authors 
of  the  Confession  maintain  the  unity  of  the  system  for  which  they 
contend  with  the  doctrines  and  worship  of  the  early  and  earliest 
ages.  This  fact  is  illustrated  in  an  interesting  manner  in  Melanch- 
thon's  letter  to  the  distinguished  theologian  Brentz,  of  Tubingen,  in 
1535  ;  when  the  former  had  already  changed  his  opinion  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  real  presence,  but  had  not  yet  published  his  altered 
convictions.  For  the  sake  of  secrecy,  he  wrote  in  Greek,  lest  his 
letter  might  fall  into  other  hands,  and  he  also  requested  his  friend 
to  destroy  it  after  perusal.*  "  I  will  not  assume  the  character  of  a 
judge,"  says  Melanchthon  ;  "  I  yield  to  you,  who  preside  over  the 
Church  :  and  I  affirm  the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  of  the  Lord 
in  the  Supper.  I  would  not  wish  to  be  the  originator  of  any  inno- 
vation. But  I  do  find  in  the  writings  of  the  ancients,  many  proofs 
that  they  regarded  the  Sacrament  as  a  type  or  trope.  Testimonies 
of  an  opposite  character,  are  either  of  later  writers,  or  are  not  gen- 
uine." In  the  edition  of  his  Loci  of  the  same  year,  he  expressed 
these  amended  views  without  reservation. 

Having  thus  disposed  of  all  preliminary  matters,  we  address  our- 
selv^es  to  the  subject  matter  of  the  Article  of  the  Confession  which 
we  have  selected,  namely,  the  third. 

The  principal  topics  referred  to  in  it,  are  : 

I.  Tlie  Incarnation  of  the  Logos,  or  Son  of  God, 

II.  77/6'  Cliristology, 

III.  The  Soteriology  of  the  Article,  and 

IV.  The  Escliatology  of  Christ. 

I.  The  Incarnation  of  the  Word,  or  Son  of  God. 

As  to  the  Logos,  or  Word,  our  Article  informs  us  :  "  The 
Churches  teach  that  the  Word,  tliat  is,  the  Son  of  God,  assumed  human 
nature,  in  the  zuomb  of  the  blessed  tnrgin  Mary,  &c. 

The  term  "Word,"  or  ?-«/0c,  is  employed  in  various  significations, 
both  in  sacred  and  profane  literature,  besides  its  primitive  literal 
sense,  to  express  an  articulate,  oral  sound.     It  is  used  in  the  gospel 

*'Op(j  6i  tzo7Jm^  tuv  na'Aaiuv  (jvyypa<j)iuv  fiapTvpiag  elvai,  ai  avev  a/x(l>ii3o?Ja^  epftrfvi- 
vovai  TO  fiv^i/piov  TTepi  tvttov  xai  TpoKix(^><;  ivav-'tai  6e  /xaprvpiac  eiaiv  tj  vtuTspat  ?/  voOoi. — 
Heppes  Co7ifessionclle  Entwickelimg  der  Alt-Protestantischen  Kirche,  p.  2\, 
22. 


72  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  John,  whence  the  Confessors  derived  it,  and  in  several  other 
passages  of  the  New  Testament,  in  what  may  be  termed  its  inspired 
signification,  to  designate  the  second  person  in  the  Trinity,  who 
became  incarnate,  and  existed  on  earth  as  Godjiiaji,  or  TJicantJiropos. 
Thus  says  John,  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,"  that  is.  The 
Logos  or  Word,  existed  from  the  beginning — "  And  the  Word  was 
with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God  " — "  And  the  Word  i^oyoq^  luas 
made  flesh  (aapf  t^fwro),  and  dwelt  among  us."  In  the  Revelation  of 
St.  John  xix:  1 1,  &c.,  says  the  holy  seer:  "And  I  saw  the  heavens 
opened,  and  behold  a  white  horse,  and  he  that  sat  upon  him  was 
called  Faithful  and  True,  and  in  righteousness  he  doth  judge  and 
make  war.  His  eyes  were  as  a  flame  of  fire,  and  on  his  head  were 
many  crowns,  and  he  had  a  name  written  that  no  man  knew  but 
himself  And  he  was  clothed  with  a  vesture  dipped^  in  blood:  and 
his  name  is  called  the  Logos,  or  Word  of  God." 

Various  are  the  learned  speculations  of  the  German  literati,  on  the 
reasons  which  induced  the  Apostle  John  to  select  the  term  'hoyoq, 
or  Word,  to  designate  the  second  person  of  the  Trinity,  whether  or 
not  it  was  the  use  of  this  term  by  his  predecessor,  the  Jew,  Philo, 
and  also  whether  the  latter  attached  the  idea  of  personality  to  the 
term  'koyo(;.  But  the  opinion  of  Neander,  the  learned  historian,  ap- 
pears more  satisfactory,  that  it  is  not  of  foreign,  but  of  independent 
scriptural  origin.  " The  title  '  Word  of  God',  (says  Neander,)  em- 
ployed to  designate  the  idea  of  the  divine  self-manifestation,  the 
Apostle  John  could  have  arrived  at  within  himself,  independently 
of  any  outward  tradition:  and  he  would  not  have  appropriated  to 
his  own  purpose  this  title,  which  had  previously  been  current  in 
certain  circles,  had  it  not  offered  itself  to  him  as  the  befitting  form  of 
expression  for  that  which  filled  his  own  soul.  But  this  word  itself 
is  certainly  not  derived,  any  more  than  the  idea  originally  expressed 
in  it,  from  the  Platonic  philosophy,  which  could  furnish  no  occasion 
whatever  for  the  choice  of  this  particular  expression.  The  Platonic 
philosophy  led  rather  to  the  employment  of  the  term  vovq,  (mind  or 
thought),  as  a  designation  of  the  mediating  principle  in  the  Deity. 
It  is  rather  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  term  Dabar, 
Word;  and  it  was  this  Old  Testament  conception,  moreover,  which 
led  to  the  New  Testament  idea  of  the  Logos.  An  intermediate 
step  is  formed,  by  what  is  said  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  con- 
cerning a  divine  "Word"  (see  Bleek's  Commentary);  and  thus  we 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  73 

find  in  the  latest  Epistles  of  Paul,  from  the  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  and  onward,  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  in  the 
Gospel  of  John,  a  well  constituted  series  of  links  in  the  progressive 
development  of  the  Apostolic  Logos-doctrine."* 

This  same  incarnate  personage  is,  both  in  the  Word  of  God  and  in 
our  Article,  also  termed  tlie  Son  of  God.  This  designation  likewise 
is  characterized  by  a  variety  of  significations.  Yet  all  agree  as  to 
the  person  intended  by  it,  whilst  there  is  some  diversity  of  views  re- 
garding  his  dignity.  Nor  can  there  be  room  for  doubt  that  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  the  Son  of  the  Virginf  Mary,  was  intended,  in  view  of 
the  declarations  of  John:  "That  God  so  loved  the  world  as  to  give 
his  only  begotten  Son" — and  that  "the  Word,"  "which  was  God," 
"became  flesh,  and  dwelt  amongst"  the  disciples,  as  the  Son  of 
Mary  did. 

Of  the  nature  and  properties  of  this  mysterious  person,  various 
conceptions  meet  us  on  the  pages  of  Patristic  literature.  They  may 
be  reduced  to  three. ]{;  In  the  earliest  period  of  the  Church,  the 
scriptural  representations  of  God  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
were  reposed  in  as  satisfactory,  and  were  enjoyed  by  Christians  in 
their  practical  influences.  The  revealed  facts  were  believed,  whilst 
their  philosophy  was  neither  known  nor  studied.  It  is  a  matter  of 
historic  certanity  that  the  Apostles  and  primitive  Christians  did 
worship  Christ  as  divine.  They  were  proverbially  known  as  those 
who  "invoke  the  name  {lirixa'Aov^ievoL  roovofta)  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  that 
is,  worship  him.  The  proto-martyr  Stephen  also  died  "  calling 
upon  the  Lord  Jesus  :"  and  of  the  same  import  in  general,  is  the 
Hebrew  phrase,  "  calling  upon  the  name  "  of  God.||  The  Roman 
writer,  Pliny,  likewise  affirms  that  Christians  assembled,  in  his  day, 
before  day-break,  to  sing  a  hymn  unto  Christ  as  God  {quasi  Deo). 

But  the  love  of  system  inherent  in  the  human  mind  led  some  ot 
the  early  fathers  to  attempt  a  more  minute  delineation  of  the  ab- 

*Neander  I.,  p.  574. 

t  Justin  Martyr,  Ireriieus  and  Tertullian,  maintain  the  necessity  of  Jesus  being 
born  of  a  viri^tn,  because  Eve  was  led  astray  by  Satan,  whilst  she  was  a  virgin. 
But  a  more  obvious  reason,  doubtless,  is  found  in  the  fact  that  it  was  necessary 
in  order  that  the  human  nature  also  of  the  Saviour  should  be  without  sin,  which 
could  not  have  been  the  case  if  born  of  sinful  parents.  See  Gieseler's  Dog- 
mengeschichte,  p.  186. 

JAugusti  Dogmengeschichte,  p.  251-256. 

II  Gen.  iv.  26;   i  Kings  xviii.  24;  Ps.  cxvi.  17:2  Kings  v.  1 1  ;  Joel  ii.  32. 


74  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

stract  person  of  the  Logos  in  himself,  as  well  in  his  state  of  incar- 
nation, or  union  with  humanity.  The  descriptions  of  some,  such  as 
Clemens  Alexandrinus.  seemed  to  regard  the  Logos,  or  Son  of  God, 
as  a  personified  attribute  of  the  Deity;  thus,  indeed,  regarding  him 
as  divine,  but  forgetting  that  one  attribute  could  not  exist  alone, 
and  that  the  Scriptures  represent  him  not  as  an  attribute,  but  as  a 
person.'^  Others,  such  as  Tertullian  and  Origcii,  regarded  the 
Logos,  not  as  an  attribute,  but  as  a  substance,  who,  according  to  the 
latter  father,  was  generated  from  eternity  out  of  the  Father,  not  as 
an  emanation,  but  like  the  will  of  man,  originating  from  his  reason. f 

During  the  earlier  part  oi  \.\\e  fourth  century,  in  the  era  of  Athana- 
sius,  the  doctrine  of  the  homoousian,  or  equality  of  essence  in  the 
Logos  or  Son  of  God,  as  well  as  his  eternal  jjeneration  from  the 
essence  of  the  Father,  was  finally  established.  It  was  permanently 
settled  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  as  the  acknowledged  view  of 
the  Christian  Church.  The  definite  specifications  of  this  theanthro- 
pic  personage,  as  progressively  affirmed  by  the  successive  Councils  of 
Nice,  A.  D.,  325,  Constantinople,  381,  Ephesus,43i,  and  Chalcedon, 
A.  D.  451,  present  the  subject  in  as  clear  a  light  as  ever  has 
been  or  ever  will  be  attained  in  this  world,  where  the  perceptions  of 
the  soul  are  limited  by  our  material  organism,  and  all  our  intellec- 
tual operations  also   are  conditioned  and  limited  by  time  and  space. 

The  language  of  the  Chalcedon  Symbol  is :  "  We  teach  that  Jesus 

*  See,  among  other  passages  of  Clemens,  "  Stromata  V.,  p.  646 — apud  Au- 
gust!,"  p.  253. 

f  See  Hspi  apxuv,  I.,  C.  2-4.  IV.  28.  Contra  Celsum,  II.  469.  Alar/ijii,  in 
his  History  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ  (pt.  I.,  p.  187),  presents  the  following  as  the 
developed  system  of  Origcn  : 

"The  Logos,  or  Son  of  God,  is  a  substance,  existing  from  eternity  aside  from 
the  Father,  and  in  accordance  with  his  will.  He  is  exalted  above  all  other 
creatures  and  endowed  with  divine  power  and  dignity,  but  at  the  same  time 
subordinate  to  the  Father,  partly  because  his  existence  and  powers  are  derived 
from  the  Father,  and  partly  because  he  in  all  things  acts  in  accordance  with  the 
will  and  prescriptions  of  the  Father.  Now,  as  Christians  acknowledge  only  one 
supreme,  independent  first  cause  of  all  things,  the  Father:  but  regard  the  Son, 
notwithstanding  all  his  perfections,  as  a  subordinate  being,  deriving  all  his  power 
from  the  Father,  and  whose  actions  and  influences  are  only  effects  of  those 
powers  conferred  upon  him  in  an  incomprehensible  manner  by  the  Father,  to 
whose  commands  also  he  in  all  things  conforms  ;  therefore  it  may  with  justice 
be  said  that  they  (Christians)  worship  only  f;;<?  God."  SeeAugusti,  sup.  cit.,  p. 
255. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  75 

Christ  is  perfect  as  respects  his  divinity,  and  perfect  as  respects  his 
humanity  ;  that  he  is  truly  God  and  truly  a  man,  consisting  of  a 
rational  soul  and  a  body  ;  that  he  is  consubstantial  (duodvmov)  with 
the  Father  as  to  his  divinity,  and  consubstantial  with  us  {(\uo6vatov)  as 
to  his  humanity,  and  like  us  in  all  respects,  sin  excepted.  He  was 
begotten  of  the  Father,  before  the  ages  (Tvpb  aiuvuv,  from  eternity)  as 
to  his  deit}';  but  in  these  last  days  he  was  born  of  Mary,  the  mother 
of  God  (flfo-ojoc)  as  to  his  humanity.  He  is  one  Christ,  existing  in 
two  natures,  without  rnixture  {aawxi'Tug),  without  change  (citpstttuc)  with- 
out division  (adeaiperug),  without  separation  (ax(jptaTuc) — the  diversity 
of  the  two  natures  not  being  at  all  destroyed  by  their  union  in  the 
person,  but  the  peculiar  properties  {nhuTr/^)  of  each  nature  being  pre- 
served, and  concurring  to  one  person  (n-poaurroi^),  and  one  subsistence 

(v7r6(TTaacv) ." 

What  relation  as  to  time  this  central  fact  of  our  holy  religion, 
the  entrance  of  the  Son  of  God  into  the  sphere  of  humanity,  by  his 
wonderful  connection  with  our  nature,  bears  to  the  universal  history 
of  all  worlds,  we  know  not;  nor  how  many  thousands  of  ages  may 
have  elapsed  between  the  creation  of  the  matter  of  our  earth  and  the 
present  organization  described  in  the  Mosaic  narrative  ;  they  having 
been  consumed  in  the  formation  of  the  different  geological  strata  of 
our  globe.  Dating  from  this  period,  and  calculating  from  events 
which  have  since  transpired  on  our  earth,  the  Saviour  was  born 
about  four  thousand  years  from  the  Mosaic  creation,  or  four  years 
before  the  time  from  which  our  present  Christian  era  was,  by  mis- 
take, dated.  Or,  attaching  the  chronology  of  our  earth  to  the  re- 
volutions of  the  larger  system  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  to  which  it 
belongs,  it  occurred  in  the  four  thousand  seven  hundred  and  tenth 
year  of  the  Julian  period.  The  precise  month  of  the  year  is  not  cer- 
tainly known,  almost  every  month  of  the  year  having  had  some  ad- 
vocates among  the  learned  of  different  ages  and  nations.  The  Latin 
and  some  other  Western  Churches  observe  the' 25th  of  December, 
which  does  not  seem  the  probable  time,  as  shepherds  do  not  ordi- 
narily keep  their  sheep  in  the  fields  during  winter  nights.  The  most 
probable  season  is  the  fall,  as  advocated  by  Lightfoot,  Scaliger, 
Caussabon  and  others. 

The  process  of  this  wonderful  union  is  usually  termed  incarnation 
{ivaapx'^niq).  The  incarnation  seems  to  have  been  necessary,  in  order 
that  men  might  be  assured  of  the  scheme  of  divine  mercy.     The 


76  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

assumption  of  angelic,  or  any  other  nature  than  that  of  man,  or  the 
performance  of  any  atoning  work  in  any  part  of  the  world  of  spirits, 
would  have  failed  to  reach  or  to  exert  any  influence  on  us; — but, 
having  assumed  our  nature,  he  could  dwell  visibly  amongst  us, 
could  instruct  us  personally,  and  die  for  us  on  the  cross.  Thus  we 
can  enter  into  brotherhood  with  Christ,  and  he  be  formed  in  us  the 
hope  of  glory.  But  it  was  necessary  not  only  to  enable  him  to 
suffer,  since  as  God  alone  he  is  impassible,  but  also  to  enable  him 
to  fulfil  the  law;  because  as  God,  the  infinite  lawgiver,  he  could  not 
have  been  subjected  to  the  law  himself.  Nor  could  he  have  fulfilled 
the  law,  which  was  adapted  to  creatures,  except  by  assuming  our 
nature.  Thus  "  God  sent  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made  under 
the  law,  to  redeem  them  that  were  under  the  law."  TJic  Word 
{}o)oq)  says  John,  became Jlcsh,  [eyh'STo  cap^),  and  dwelt  amongst  us,  i. 
14.  And  Paul  to  Timothy  says:  "Without  controversy,  great  is  the 
mystery  of  godliness,  God  tvas  manifestci  in  ilie  flesh  {kipavepuer^  h 
capxi),"  I  Tim.  iii.  16.  To  the  Philippians  he  testifies  of  Jesus  Christ, 
that  "being  in  the  form  of  God,  he  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be 
equal  with  God;  but  made  himself  of  no  reputation,  and  took  upon 
him  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  zvas  made  in  the  likeness  of  men 
{tv  ofioiufiaTL  avdpunuv  ^nd^erof)"  ii.  6,  /.  And  to  the  Galatiaus  he  says  : 
"  But  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come,  God  sent  forth  his  Son, 
made  of  a  ivoinan  {yn>6f/£vo^  ek  ■)vvaixog),"  iv.  4.  And  the  aged  and  be- 
loved apostle  John,  testifies  that  ^esus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh 
{h  oapx'i  ipSev)  I  John  iv.  iii.  The  possibility,  or  at  least  the  suitable- 
ness, of  the  hypostatic  union  of  the  Son  of  God  with  human  nature, 
seems  to  be  based  on  the  fact  of  our  original  innocence  and  holiness, 
for  it  seems  revolting  to  our  sense  of  propriety,  that  the  holy  God 
should  thus  enter  into  permanent  union  with  a  corrupt  and  sinful 
nature.  Accordingly  a  human  nature,  restored  to  its  primitive 
purity,  was  miraculously  provided,  by  the  overshadowing  of  the 
Virgin  Mary  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  her  immaculate  conception. 
Yet  great  is  the  mystery  of  godliness  when  God  was  manifested  in 
the  flesh.  Nor  could  the  opposite  be  reasonably  expected.  If  it  be 
admitted  that  the  origin  of  human  life,  in  ordinary  cases,  is  wrapped 
up  in  mystery  by  the  Creator,  how  much  more  must  this  be  the 
case  when  the  second  person  of  the  Trinity  humbles  himself  so  far 
as  to  be  born  of  a  woman,  to  be  ushered  into  this  world  in  union 
with  a  human  nature,  with  the  babe  of  Bethlehem !    The  fact,  namely, 


PERSON    AND    WORK   OF    CHRIST.  T] 

unity  of  person  and  duality  of  nature,  is  all  we  know,  or  can  know; 
it  is  fully  attested  by  the  Word  of  God,  and  we  shall  do  well,  with- 
out wishini^  to  be  wise  above  what  is  written,  to  labor  to  secure  the 
boundless  benedictions  tendered  to  our  race  by  this  wonderful  exhi- 
bition of  divine  love  and  mercy.* 

II.     The  Christology  of  the  Article,  or  the  Person  of  the 

GODMAX. 

We  now  approach  the  Christology  of  the  Article,  that  portion  of 
it  which  relates  to  tJic  Person  of  the  Godman,  or  Theanthropos,  the 
incarnate  Son  of  God. 

The  language  of  the  Creed  is,  "  That  the  tivo  natures,  human  and 
divine,  inseparably  united  into  one  person,  constitute  one  Christ,  who  is 
true  God  and  man!' 

The  fundamental  importance  of  this  doctrine,  both  in  its  divine 
and  human  factors,  as  defined  by  the  several  Councils  of  Ephesus 
and  Chalcedon,  is  vindicated  by  the  entire  Christian  Church,  in  its 
Greek,  its  Romish,  and  its  Protestant  departments.  '  Nor  is  there 
any  deficiency  of  evidence. 

That  Jesus  Christ  was  man  must  have  been  certainly  known  to 
those  around  him,  by  the  testimony  of  the  senses. 

That  he  was  an  extraordinary  messenger  from  God,  was  evident 
from  his  numerous  miracles,  performed  in  support  of  his  instructions 
and  mission. 

But  the  peculiar  nature  of  this  union,  the  fact  that  the  divinity 
dwelt  within  him,  that  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  the  second  person  of 
the  Trinity,  was  personally  united  to  him,  could  be  learned  only 
from  the  declarations  of  the  inspired  Word. 

*The  subject  of  the  mysterious  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  is  thus  defined  in 
the  systematic  language  of  different  early  Creeds. 

The  so-called  Apostles^  Creed,  "Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  was  born  of 
the  Virgin  Mary  [natits  ex  Maria  Viri^inc)." — Muller's  Symb.  B.,  p.  29. 

The  Nicene  Creed  says  the  Son  of  God  descended  from  heaven  for  our  sal- 
vation and  became  incarnate  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  the  Virgin,  and  was  made 
tnan  {incarnates  est  dc  Spiriiti  sane  to  ex  Maria  I'irgine,  et  homo  factus  est). 
— Symb.  B.,  p.  29. 

The  Athanasian  Creed  affirms  :  It  is  necessary — faithfully  to  believe  "  the 
incarnation  of  our  Lord  fesus  Christ  "—That  as  God  he  was  born  of  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Father  from  eternity  ;  and  as  man  was  born  in  time  of  the  sub- 
stance of  his  mother  [hotno  ex  substantia  matris  in  seculo  naius.) — Idem. 


"/S  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

And  what  is  the  testimony  on  this  subject?  Before  entering  on 
it,  let  us  premise  a  few  general  considerations  on  the  nature  of  lan- 
guage and  modes  of  expression  concerning  substances,  persons  and 
predicates,  that  we  may  the  better  understand  those  in  which  the 
Scriptures  teach  this  doctrine. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  universe  around  us  is  known  to  us  only  by 
the  properties  of  the  different  objects  reached  by  our  senses,  such  as 
white,  black,  heavy,  light,  circular,  square,  sweet,  sour,  etc.  These 
properties  are  never  found  existing  singly,  but  always  several  of 
them  in  combinations  or  clusters,  each  of  which  is  judged  by  all 
men  to  belong  to  some  substance  or  essence,  such  as  stone,  tree, 
horse,  dog,  etc.  Of  such  substances  or  essences,  however,  we  know 
nothing  beyond  these  manifestations  called  properties.  Each  of 
these  combinations  of  properties  forms  a  unit,  by  the  divine  consti- 
tution of  things;  and  human  language  furnishes  words  not  only  for 
each  of  these  properties,  but  also  for  the  supposed  substance  or  es- 
sence to  which  they  appertain.  If  this  unit  be  an  inanimate  object, 
it  is  called,  in  human  language,  a  tilings  such  as  a  stone,  a  tree,  a 
house,  etc.  If  it  is  a  living,  irrational  being,  the  usage  of  language 
terms  it  an  aiihiial,  as  dog,  horse,  elephant. 

If  this  unit  to  whom  certain  properties  belong,  be  an  intelligent, 
rational  being,  it  is  termed  a  person,  such  as  man,  angel,  God. 

By  person  in  general  we,  therefore,  understand  a  living,  rational, 
free  and  responsible  being,  to  whom  certain  properties  permanently 
belong,  and  who  is  an  agent  or  source  of  action,  and  further,  in  the 
case  of  man,  also  possesses  a  body. 

Throughout  all  history  these  persons  have  remained  separate  and 
distinct.  Between  these  properties  generally  we  can  trace  two 
lines  of  resemblance,  according  to  which  they  have  ordinarily  been 
divided  into  two  classes,  namely,  those  of  matter  and  vtind.  All 
animals,  rational  and'  irrational,  have  properties  belonging  to  both 
these  classes,  unless,  perhaps,  it  be  some  animals  of  the  lowest  grade, 
whose  instincts  may  scarcely  partake  of  any  intellectual  character. 

Yet  in  speaking  of  the  mental  or  material  properties  of  any  of 
these  animals  or  persons,  all  men  alike  attribute  them  to  one  and 
the  same  animal  or  person.  Thus  in  man,  mental  and  material 
properties  found  co-existing,  are  always  attributed  to  the  one  pejson, 
in  all  languages  and  nations;  and  common  sense  decides  in  regard 
to  each  property  or  act  affirmed,  whether  it  belongs  to  his  body  or 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  79 

his  mind.  But  in  every  such  case  they  are  all  attributed  to  the  one 
person.  Thus  the  one  person  James  eats,  James  drinks,  James 
thinks,  James  reasons.  And  this  seems  to  be  the  will  of  the  Creator, 
fixed  in  the  constitution  of  nature  and  of  the  mind,  that  all  the 
properties,  bodily  and  mental,  found  habitually  co-existing  in  the  same 
being,  do  constitute  a  unit  or  one  person,  and  we  are  compelled  by  our 
mental  structure  to  think  and  to  speak  of  them  as  together  forming 
one  being  or  person.  This  is  also  the  way  in  which  the  Scriptures 
always  speak  of  things,  of  animals,  of  men,  of  angels,  and  of  God. 

Now^  when  we  investigate  the  inspired  records  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  according  to  the  most  approved  principles  of  historical 
int«?f'pretation,  we  find  them  speaking  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as 
being  the  Logos  or  Word,  who  was  God  and  became  flesh,  as  the 
Messiah  promised  in  the  Old  Testament,  who  came  to  redeem  and 
save  our  fallen  race.  We  find  that  in  numerous  passages  they  at- 
tribute divine  properties  and  actions  to  him,  and  in  others,  yea, 
sometimes  in  the  same  passage,  also  ascribe  human  properties  and 
actions  to  the  same  person,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it  manifest 
that  these  two  natures,  human  and  divine,  have,  in  the  mysterious 
purposes  of  God,  been  united  into  one  person,  as  certainly  as  soul 
and  body  are  in  man.  In  short,  to  use  a  term  first  introduced  by 
Origen,  of  the  third  century,  we  find  him  represented  as  the  God- 
man,  the  Thcanthropos,  a  person  possessing  two  natures,  one  human 
and  the  other  divine. 

All  the  inspired  teachings  on  this  subject  may  be  reduced  to  the 
following  five  general  features :  i.  That  the  Saviour  was  truly  divine. 
2.  That  he  was  also  possessed  of  a  real  human  nature.  3.  That 
these  two  natures  were  permanently  and  inseparably  7tnited ;  and  4. 
That  the  properties  of  each  nature  remained  perfectly  distinct  from 
those  of  the  other.  5.  That  the  properties  and  actions  of  both 
natures  which  are  thus  affirmed  of  the  one  person  do  really  all  be- 
long to  that  person. 

I.  The  Saviour  ivas  possessed  of  a  truly  divine  nature.  On  this 
subject  let  us  listen  to  the  Messianic  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament. 

In  addition  to  the  manifest  intimation  of  his  human  nature,  by  the 
Evangelical  prophet  Isaiah,  in  the  words,  "  The  Lord  himself  shall 
give  you  a  sign,  Behold,  a  virgin  shall  conceive  and  bear  a  son,  and 
shall  call  his  name  Immanuel;"*  his  divinity  is  most  clearly  taught. 

*  Isaiah  vii.  14.     See  also  Gen.  iii.  15;  xii.  3;  xlix.  8. 


8o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Isaiah,  seven  hundred  and  forty-one  years  before  the  Saviour's 
birth,  says,  "  He  shall  be  called  God  ivith  us,  Immanuel* — yea,  the 
migliiy  God,  (ix.  6).  For  unto  us  a  child  is  born,  and  unto  us  a 
Son  is  given,  and  the  government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulder:  and 
his  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful  Counsellor,  the  Mighty  God,  the 
Everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of  Peace." 

Jeremiah  says,  "  He  (the  future  king  of  David)  shall  be  called  The 
Lord  our  Righteousness  (xxiii.  6).  • 

The  prophet  MicaJi,  seven  hundred  and  ten  years  before  Christ, 
testifies,  that  the  ''goings  forth  "  (of  the  predicted  ruler)  "  have  been 
from  of  old,  from  everlasting "  (v.  2).  "  But  thou  Bethlehem, 
Ephrata,  though  thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah,  yet 
out  of  thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be  Ruler  in  Israel; 
whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of  old,  from  everlasting." 

Now  it  is  well  known,  that  in  the  universal  profane  literature  of 
the  world,  we  look  in  vain  for  such  a  train  of  prophecies  concerning 
any  deliverer  of  men,  spreading  over  several  thousand  years,  and 
positively  fulfilled,  as  that  contained  in  the  Scriptures  concerning 
Christ,  both  David's  Son  and  David's  Lord. 

Come  we  to  the  New  Testament,  we  hear  the  forerunner  of  the 
Saviour,  ^ohn  the  Baptist,  exclaim  (John  i.  27):  "  He  it  is,  who,  com- 
ing after  me,  is  preferred  before  me,  whose  shoe's  latchet  lam  not 
worthy  to  unloose" — and  again,  when  he  beheld  Jesus  coming  unto 
him,  "Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world." 

But  the  Saviour's  own  declarations  concerning  himself,  authenti- 
cated as  they  are  by  the  numerous  miracles  of  his  life,  clearly  evince 
his  antemundane  existence,  his  omnipotence,  omnipresence,  divine 
"  glory  with  the  Father,"  and  "equality  with  the  Father." 

''Before  Abraham  was,  I  am"  John  viii.  58.  "And  now,  O 
Father,  glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self,  with  the  glory  zvhich  I 
had  zvith  thee,  before  the  world  tvas ^'  ]ohn  xvii.  5.  "  All poiuer  \s 
given  unto  me  z;z  heaven  and  on  earth,"  Matt,  xxviii.  18.  "Where 
two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  I  am  in  the 
midst  of  them,"  Matt,  xviii.  20.  "Lo!  I  am  with  you  akvay,  evQx\ 
unto  the  end  of  the  world','  Matt,  xxviii.  20.  "  The  Father  hath 
committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son,  that  all  men  should  honor  the 
Son,  even  as  they  honor  the  Father"  John  v.  22,  23.     See  also  John 

*  Isaiah  vii.  14. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  8 1 

V.  26;  xiv.  9;  X.  30 ;  V.  18  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  6^, — "  The  high  priest  said 
unto  him,  I  adjure  thee  by  the  hving  God,  that  thou  tell  us  whether 
thou  be  the  Christ  (the  Messiah),  the  Son  of  God.  Jesus  saith  unto 
him,  Thou  hast  said." 

Hear  the  testimony  of  the  FatJicr  2X.  the  Saviour's  baptism:  "And, 
lo,  the  heavens  were  opened  unto  him,  and  he  saw  the  Spirit  of  God 
descending  like  a  dove  and  lighting  upon  him  :  And,  lo,  a  voice 
from  heaven  saying.  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom  1  am  well 
pleased,"  Matt.  iii.  16,  17. 

And  near  the  close  of  the  Saviour's  pilgrimage,  on  the  Mount  of 
Traiisfignration,  the  Father  again  repeated  his  attestation,  in  the 
words  utterred  from  the  overshadowing  cloud,  "  This  is  my  beloved 
Son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased  :  hear  ye  him,"  Matt.  xvii.  5. 

Of  similar  import  is  the  testimony  of  the  apostles,  who  being  his 
daily  associates,  had  full  opportunity  of  knowing  him,  and  being 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  were  fully  instructed  on  all  things  per- 
taining to  the  kingdom. 

Thus  jfolin,  the  specially  beloved  disciple  of  the  Lord,  in  the 
proem  of  his  gospel,  penned  probably  in  opposition  to  the  Cerinthians, 
who  denied  the  divinity  of  Christ, — expressly  tells  us,  that  the  Logos 
or  Word,  who  became  flesh  and  dwelt  amongst  them,  positively  had 
existed  with  God  in  the  beginning,  nay  that  he  actually  was  God," 
John  i.  I,  etc.  And  again,  the  same  apostle  explicitly  testifies,  that 
the  Son  of  God  is  come — and  this  is  the  true  God  and  eternal  life," 
I  John  V.  20.  The  apostle  Paul  declares  the  Saviour  "  to  be  God 
over  all  blessed  for  ever,"  Rom.  ix.  5.  That  in  him  "  dwelt  all  the 
fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily,"  Col.  ii.  ix.  That  "God  zvas  in  Christ, 
reconciling  the  zvorld  u)ito  himself,''  2  Cor.  v.  19. 

And  the  apostle  Thomas,  whose  faith  had  wavered  before,  when 
the  Saviour  appeared  to  him  and  he  inspected  the  signs  of  his  iden- 
tity exclaimed,  "My  Lord  and  my  God!"  See  also  Philippians  ii. 
6-11;  Heb.  i.  8,  9;  John  iii.  16;  Titus  ii.  13;  James  ii.  i;  Rev.  i.  8; 
xix.  10. 

The  Scriptures  also  represent  him  as  performing  divine  zvorks. 
"All  things,"  says  John  (i.  3)  "  were  made  by  him,  and  without  him 
was  not  anything  made  that  was  made."  That  the  work  of  creation 
transcends  the  power  of  the  creature  and  involves  the  true  divinity 
of  the  Being  exercising  it,  it  were  superfluous  to  prove,  as  it  is  ad- 
mitted by  all.     Yet  in  Col.  i.  16,  the  apostle  Paul  asserts,  "  that  by 


82  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

him  (Christ,  Col.  i.  3,  4)  were  all  things  created  that  are  in  heaven 
and  that  are  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible,"  etc.  Heb.  i.  2,  3,  "God 
— hath  by  his  Son — made  the  world,"  etc. 

Yet  more,  the  inspired  volume  explicitly  ascribes  divine  attributes 
and  divijie  ivorsJdp  to  this  wonderful  personage,  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

It  will  be  admitted  that  no  infinite  attributes  can  possibly  apper- 
tain to  his  human  nature.  Hence  there  must  be  united  with  the 
man  Jesus,  a  higher,  a  divine  nature,  of  which  such  attributes  are 
predicable,  and  united  in  so  close  a  manner  as  to  render  proper  the 
application  of  these  predicates  to  the  one  complex  person,  Jesus 
Christ.  Of  an  irrational  animal,  an  elephant  or  horse,  we  cannot 
say,  as  we  can  in  reference  to  any  human  being,  he  is  mortal  and  he 
is  immortal.  Nor  are  we  at  a  loss  for  the  reason.  Although  we  in 
both  cases  see  nothing  more  than  the  mortal  body,  yet  in  regard 
to  human  beings,  we  have  conclusive  evidence  that  an  invisible 
immortal  spirit  is  united  to  the  visible  body.  So,  also,  if  the  in- 
spired writers  had  not  believed  that  the  divine  being,  the  Logos  or 
Son  of  God,  was  in  an  analagous,  but  equally  mysterious  manner, 
united  to  the  man  Jesus,  it  Ayould  have  been  utterly  unmeaning  in 
them  to  attribute  divine  attributes  to  him.  Yet  they  ascribe  to  him 
ovinipotence,^  omniscience^  and  the  fullness  of  the  GodheadX  that 
is,  the  entire  mass  of  the  divine  perfections,  ox  gloiy  with  the  Father 
ere  the  world  was.§ 

As  to  divine  worship  or  adoration,  it  is  that  supreme  regard  and 
reverence,  which  can  properly  be  offered  onl}'  to  the  Supreme 
Being.  It  is  entirely  peculiar  in  its  nature.  It  is  the  reverence  due 
to  infinite  perfection,  and  cannot  properly  be  ottered  to  any  finite 
being,  not  even  to  angels  or  archangels,  to  cherubim  or  seraphim. 
It  differs  from  all  other  feelings  of  respect  or  affection,  both  in  kind 
and  degree,  being  based  on  the  claims  which  infinite  perfections,  as 
well  as  creative  and  supporting  power,  alone  have  on  all  intelligent 
beings. 

Hence  as  no  creature,  not  even  the  archangels  around  the  throne 

*  Philip,  iii.  21  ;  John  .x.  18;  2  Pet.  i.  3  ;  Acts  iii.  22. 
t  Acts  i.  24;  I  Cor.  iv.  5;  Rev.  ii.  23. 
X  Col.  ii.  8.  9. 

§  John  V.  23;  I  Cor.  i.  i,  2  ;  Acts  vii.  55,  59 ;  Heb.  i.  6 ;  Phil.  ii.  10,  11  ;  Rom. 
X.  9-14;  Rev.  V.  9-14. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  83 

of  God,  possesses  infinite  perfections,  or  created  and  supported  any- 
being,  no  creature  c-^w  have  a  claim  to  worship  or  adoration.  When 
St.  John  fell  down  before  the  angel  in  the  Apocalypse,  to  worship 
him,  the  angelic  messenger  repelled  the  tender,  saying,  See  thou  do 
it  not.  Worship  God,  Rev.  xxii.  9;  xix.  10;  Matt.  iv.  10.  This 
idea  of  the  peculiarity  of  worship,  as  exclusively  applicable  to  the 
Supreme  Being,,  pervades  the  Scriptures. 

Sincere  worship  also  implies  a  conscious  obligation,  in  its  subject, 
oi  supreme  obedience  to  God.  "Thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy 
God,"  said  Jesus  to  Satan,  "  and  Jnni  only  shalt  thou  serve,''  Matt.  iv.  10. 

Hence,  when  the  Scriptures  inculcate  on  all  men  the  duty  oi zuor- 
sJupping  the  Saviour,  they  afford  the  strongest  possible  evidence  of 
his  divinity.  And  how  strong  and  emphatic  the  language  in  which 
they  hold  up  this  obligation !  "  That  all  men  should  honor  the  Son, 
even  as  they  honor  the  Father.  He  that  honoreth  not  the  Son, 
honoreth  not  the  Father  who  hath  sent  him,"  John  v.  23.  "  Let  all 
the  angels  of  God  worship  him,"  (namely,  the  first  begotten,  whom 
he  hath  brought  into  the  world,)  Heb.  i.  6. 

That  "at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,"  &c.,  Philip. 
ii :    10,  1 1. 

"  And  they  sang  a  new  song,"  &c.,  Rev.  v:  9-14. 

It  is,  therefore,  evident,  that  if  it  is  possible  for  language  to  con- 
vey definite  ideas  on  this  subject,  the  Scriptures  do  teach  the  divin- 
ity of  Christ.  Yes,  it  is  certain,  the  infinite  Jehovah  did  conde- 
scend to  veil  himself  in  human  flesh,  the  Infinite  docs  dwell  with  the 
finite,  the  Creator  with  the  creature.  Thus,  also,  the  infinitely  Holy 
reveals  himself  to  the  vilest  sinners,  and  tenders  pardon  and  re- 
newed favor  to  all  who  will  accept  the  proffered  boon. 

And  it  is  also  true,  that  those  ancient  Arians  and  modern  Socin- 
ians,  who  would  strike  the  crown  from  the  head  of  the  Redeemer, 
and  strip  the  Saviour  of  his  divinity,  are  condemned  by  the  plain 
and  natural  import  of  the  inspired  record.  Not  unjustly,  therefore, 
were  the  founders  of  the  former  sect  adjudged  to  be  heretics  by  the 
Council  of  Nice,  in  the  fourth  century;  as  are  also  all  the  latter  by 
the  common  judgment  of  the  orthodox  Churches  since  the  days  of 
Socinus  in  the  sixteenth  century,  by  whatever  name  they  may  be 
known;  whether  it  be  that  of  Socinians,  Unitarians,  Universalists,  or 
Rationalists.  All  these  persons  err,  by  approaching  the  Scriptures 
with  the  pre-determined  belief,  that  such  a  union  of  the  divine  and 


84  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

human  natures,  in  one  person,  is  contrary  to  reason  ;  and,  therefore, 
they  refuse  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  on  the  subject  of  the  Saviour's 
person  according  to  the  acknowledged  principles  of  hermeneutics 
which  are  applied  to  other  subjects,  resorting  to  all  manner  of  ex- 
pedients to  evade  their  natural  and  proper  meaning. 

Furthermore,  these  errorists  forget  the  distinction  between  things 
that  are  above  reason,  and  such  as  are  contrary  to  it.  They  forget, 
that  whilst  no  intelligent  minds  can  believe  things  which  they  see 
to  be  contrary  to  reason,  all  men,  learned  and  unlearned,  daily  and 
hourly  do  believe  facts,  which  are  utterly  above  reason,  and  inexpli- 
cable in  their  intrinsic  nature  or  relations.  Of  these  the  single  ex- 
ample of  the  union  of  the  soul  and  body  in  one  person  in  man,  may 
suffice  :  which  all  men  admit  and  believe,  and  yet  no  man  can  ex- 
plain or  comprehend,  any  more  than  the  union  of  the  divine  and 
human  natures  in  the  one  person,  Jesus,  the  Messiah  or  Christ. 

2.  Again,  the  sacred  writers  teach,  that  the  Son  of  God,  the  Logos, 
or  Word,  assumed  a  true  hiiinan  nature,  and  not  only  an  apparent 
one,  as  was  maintained  by  the  Monarchians  or  Patripassians,  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  second  century.  These  errorists  asserted,  that  one 
single  person  in  the  Godhead,  the  absolute  Deity,  united  itself  with 
a  human  body;  but  a  body  destitute  of  a  rational  soul,  which  was, 
therefore,  not  a  proper  and  complete  human  being.  But  the  sacred 
volume  affirms  the  actual,  proper  humanity  of  the  Godman,  just  as 
unequivocally  as  his  Divinity.  "  Forasmuch,  then,  as  the  children 
are  partakers  of  flesh  and  blood,  he  (Christ)  also  himself  likewise 
took  part  of  the  same,  that  through  death  he  might  destroy  him 
that  had  the  power  of  death,  that  is,  the  devil,"  Heb.  ii :    14. 

The  genuineness  of  his  humanity  is  evinced  by  the  fact,  that  he 
was  born  as  "a  child,"  he  grew  in  knowledge  and  in  stature,  he  ate, 
he  drank,  he  slept,  thrice  he  wept  in  sympathy  for  the  sorrows  of 
humanity  (Luke  xix:  41),  he  suffered  hunger,  and  thirst,  and  pains 
and  death.  He  had  "  flesh  and  bones,"  as  other  men,  (Luke  xxiv: 
39).  Nor  had  he  merely  a  body  without  the  higher  rational  part  of 
humanity.  "  My  sour,'  said  he,  "  is  exceedingly  sorrowful  even 
unto  death."*  And  this  soul  possessed  not  only  knowledge,  but 
also  a  will.     "  Not  my  zaill,"  said  he,  "  but  thine  be  done."t 

It  is  true,  all  that  mortal  eyes  saw  of  his  person  was  the  created 

*  Matt,  xxvi :  38  |  Luke  xxii :  42. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  85 

human  being,  Jesus,  the  son  of  Mary.  The  fact  that  the  invisible 
divinity,  the  Son  of  God,  dwelt  within  him,  as  well  as  the  extent 
and  peculiar  nature  of  this  union,  could  not  be  seen  by  mortal  eyes, 
nor  even  inferred  primarily  from  his  miracles  :  for  other  men  also 
wrought  miracles.  This  important  doctrine  was  learned  from  his 
own  declarations  on  the  subject,  and  those  of  his  inspired  apostles, 
supported  by  the  stupendous  miracles  and  every  other  species  of 
evidence,  which  both  he  and  they  exhibited,  to  substantiate  the 
divinity  of  their  mission. 

As  we  are  told  (Heb.  iv.  15)  that  in  Jesus  "we  have  not  a  high 
priest  who  cannot  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmities  ; 
but  was  in  all  points  tempted  like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin  ;"  the 
question  arises,  was  the  Saviour  subject  to  those  temptations  which 
resulted  from  our  depraved  nature  ?  To  this  we  reply,  that  as  he 
was  not  tainted  by  natural  depravity,  he  could  not  have  been  so 
tempted.  His  susceptibility  was  probably  like  that  of  Adam  in  his 
state  of  innocence  before  the  fall,  liable  to  all  kinds  of  temptation, 
as  we  now  are,  except  in  so  far  as  they  result  from  our  own  deprav- 
ity. That  these  temptations  may  be  very  strong,  even  in  a  state 
of  innocence,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  both  Adam  and  Eve  fell 
victims  to  their  influence  and  lost  their  first  estate. 

3.  TJic  Scriptures  further  teach  that  these  two  natures  are  perma- 
nently united  into  one  person. 

The  language  of  our  Article  is,  "  The  two  natures,  human  and 
divine,  are  inseparably  united  into  one  person,  who  is  true  God  and 
man."  The  intrinsic  nature  of  this  union,  termed,  in  theological 
nomenclature,  the  hypostatic  or  personal  union,  is  incomprehensible 
to  us.  The  illustrious  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  himself  styles  it  a 
great  mystery.  "  Great,"  says  he,  "  without  controversy  is  the 
mystery  of  godliness  :  God  was  manifested  in  the  flesh,  justi- 
fied in  the  Spirit,  seen  of  angels,  preached  unto  the  Gentiles,  be- 
lieved on  in  the  world,  received  up  into  glory."*  Yet  the  facts 
which  are  revealed  concerning  it,  we  understand  and  hold  fast ;  and 
the  intrinsic  nature  of  the  union  itself,  is  not  more  incomprehensible 
than  that  of  soul  and  body  in  man,  which  all  men  do  believe. 

But  let  us  hear  the  inspired  writers  on  this  subject. 

"  For,"  says  Paul,  "  there  is  one  God  and  one  Mediator  between 

*  I  Tim.  iii.  16. 


86  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

God  and  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus."*  "  In  him  (Christ  Jesus,  v. 
8)  dwelleth  all  the  fullness  of  the  Godhead  bodily. "t  And  in  a  sin- 
gle verse  to  the  Romans,|  he  teaches  both  the  divine  and  human 
natures :  "  Whose  (the  Israelites')  are  the  fathers,  and  of  whom,  as 
concerning  the  flesli,  Christ  came,  who  is  over  all  God,  blessed  for- 
ever. Amen."  In  Philippians  ii.  6-1 1,  he  speaks  in  detail  of  both 
natures,  manifestly  referring  to  one  and  the  same  person.  In  some 
passages,  action  and  attributes  belonging  to  his  human  nature  are 
affirmed  of  Christ,  whilst  he  is  designated  by  a  name  implying 
divinity,  as  in  Matt.  i.  23;  Luke  i.  31,  32;  Acts  xx.  28;  Rom.  viii. 
32  ;   I  Cor.  ii.  8  ;   Col.  i.    13,  14. 

And  in  other  passages,  divine  actions  and  attributes  are  predicated 
of  him  under  names  implying  his  humanity.  John  iii.  13;  Rom. 
ix.  5  ;   Rev.  v.  12. 

It  therefore  follows,  that  whatever  be  the  nature  of  this  hypostatic 
union,  it  is  of  such  a  character  as  to  admit  the  reciprocal  ascription 
of  attributes  taken  from  either  nature,  to  the  one  theanthropic  per- 
son, and  of  the  designation  of  that  person  by  names  taken  either 
from  the  human  or  divine  nature. 

It  is  also  worthy  of  note  that  the  Logos  or  Son  of  God,  who  had 
existed  from  eternity  as  the  second  person  of  the  holy  Trinity,  united 
himself  to  a  human  nature,  and  not  to  a  distinct  limnan  person.  The 
human  nature  of  Christ  had  never  existed  as  a  separate  person. 
Had  Jesus  Christ  first  existed  some  time  as  a  distinct  person,  the 
Godman  would  necessarily  have  consisted  of  two  persons,  as  well 
as  of  two  natures.  Hence,  when  his  humanity  is  spoken  of,  the 
reference  is  to  his  human  nature,  and  not  to  a  human  personality, 
and  that  nature  should  always  be  regarded  as  connected  with  the 
divine  person.  Jesus  Christ  is  not,  and  never  was,  a  mere  man,  but 
a  human  nature  combined  with  a  divine  person  and  divine  nature. 
The  incarnation  consisted  in  humanizing  the  divinity,  and  not  in 
deifying  humanity.  Each  nature  of  the  Saviour  enables  him  to 
perform  actions  appropriate  to  itself  All  the  actions  or  sufferings 
performed  or  experienced  by  the  Godman  or  theanthropic  person, 
literally  and  truly  belong  to  that  person,  no  matter  which  of  the 


*  I  Tim.  ii.  5. 
t  Col.  ii.  9. 

X  Rom.  ix.  5.     See  also  Phil.  ii.  8-1 1  ;  i  John  i.  i ,  2 ;  iv.  2,  3  ;  Gal.  iv.  4  ;  Col. 
ii.  9,  etc. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  87 

two  natures  makes  him  capable  of  performing  them;  just  as  much 
as  do  mental  and  bodily  acts  in  man  both  belong  to  the  one  person 
or  man,  in  whom  tb.ese  powers  of  mind  and  body  are  found. 

After  Jesus  entered  on  his  public  ministry,  if  not  also  before,  it  is 
probable  that  the  divine  theanthropic  person  originated  all  the  acts 
of  his  two  natures,  and,  therefore,  also  those  which  were  performed 
through  the  powers  and  organs  of  his  human  body  and  mind. 
Hence  all  these  acts  are  really  the  acts  of  the  theanthropic  person, 
and  derive  their  dignity  and  importance  from  it;  and  this  is  true 
as  much  with  those  performed  through  his  human  as  his  divine 
nature. 

All  the  actions  of  the  Godman,  or  Theanthropos,  relating  to  his 
human  nature,  were  directed  immediately  by  his  human  will,  but 
under  the  superintendence  of  the  divine.  Whenever  actions  sur- 
passing the  powers  of  humanity  were  performed  by  the  Saviour 
they  were  produced  by  the  Theanthropos,  through  his  divine  nature, 
in  harmony  with  the  purposes  and  actions  of  the  human. 

The  correct  view  of  this  subject  has  frequently  been  illustrated  by 
the  analogy  of  human  personality.  Man  consists  of  two  natures  or 
parts,  a  body  and  a  soul,  a  material  and  mental  nature,  known  to 
all  the  world  as  distinct  by  their  different  properties.  Yet  the  two 
united  constitute  the  person  man,  the  self-conscious  self,  the  ego. 
Every  property  belonging  to  him  pertains  to  one  or  other  of  his  two 
natures,  either  to  his  body  or  mind.  Yet  both  belong  to  the  one  per- 
son. Neither  nature  alone  constitutes  the  person,  but  the  person  re- 
sults from  both,  and  represents  both.  The  body  is  not  the  man  and 
the  soul  is  not  the  man,  but  the  man  results  from  the  union  of  the  two. 
Thus,  also,  neither  the  Son  of  God  alone,  nor  the  man  Jesus  alone, 
constitutes  the  Christ  or  promised  Messiah,  but  both  united  form 
the  Saviour,  and  are  represented  by  the  Theanthropic  person,  the 
Godman.  Such  is  manifestly  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures  as  to 
the  human  and  divine  natures  in  the  one  Theanthropic  person  of  the 
blessed  Redeemer. 

The  purposes  of  the  Saviour's  divine  nature  in  the  progress  of  the 
work  of  redemption,  as  also  the  peculiarity  of  his  relation  to  God, 
probably  became  known  to  his  humanit}^  gradually,  as  the  develop- 
ment of  his  human  nature  enabled  him  to  comprehend  them.  Even 
in  his  early  years,  being  free  from  sin,  in  a  state  resembling  that  of 
Adam  before  the  fall,  he  doubtless  enjoyed  the  same  peculiar  near- 


88  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ness  to  God  which  Adam  did  in  his  primitive  innocence,  but  was 
unacquainted  with  the  personal  (hypostatic)  union  of  the  Logos  or 
Word  with  him.  At  twelve  years  of  age  he  was  already  conscious 
of  having  a  special  mission,  by  further  communications  from  the 
divine  nature.  Hence  when  his  mother  found  him  in  the  temple, 
and  inquired  the  cause  of  his  tarrying  behind,  saying,  "  Behold  thy 
father  and  I  have  sought  thee  sorrowing,"  he  replied,  "  How  is  it 
that  ye  sought  me?  wist  ye  not  that  I  mu.st  be  about  my  Father's 
business?"  Doubtless  the  consciousness  of  this  vocation,  and  the 
fullness  of  communications  from  the  Logos,  increased  progressively. 
At  what  precise  time  he  became  fully  conscious  of  the  constant  and 
personal  union  of  the  Son  of  God  with  him  we  know  not.  It  may 
have  been  earlier,  but  certainly  was  not  later  than  the  date  of  his 
baptism,  when  the  voice  from  heaven  proclaimed,  "This  is  my  well- 
beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased."  After  his  public  minis- 
try commenced,  we  must  suppose  him  to  have  possessed  this  con- 
sciousness habitually.  Yet  were  the  divine  attributes  not  always  in 
exercise  in  him,  for  he  himself  has  said,  "But  of  that  day  (of  Judg- 
ment) and  that  hour  knoweth  no  man ;  no,  not  the  angels  that  are  in 
heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father,"  Mark  xiii.  32  ;  Matt  xxiv. 

36,  42. 

From  this  discussion  we  clearly  see  the  error  of  the  Ncstorian 
Christology  of  the  fifth  century  (A.  D.,  430),  which  regarded  the 
two  natures  of  the  Saviour,  not  as  united  into  one  person,  but  as  ex- 
isting in  two  separate  self-conscious  persons,  the  one  human  and  the 
other  divine.  As,  according  to  that  view,  there  is  only  a  moral 
union  between  the  two  persons,  the  actions  of  either  can  derive  no 
character  or  influence  from  the  qualities  or  dignity  of  the  other. 

4.  Tlicre  is  no  commixture  of  the  tzvo  natures,  the  human  and  the 
divine. 

In  all  other  cases  in  the  universe,  we  find  that  the  essential  prop- 
erties belonging  to  any  being,  animal  or  person,  remain  the  .same, 
and  each  retains  its  distinctive  nature  in  perpetuity.  Thus  in  man, 
however  various  the  operations  he  performs,  or  the  combinations  he 
contemplates,  his  mental  powers  never  become  material,  nor  does 
his  body  ever  become  a  faculty  of  his  mind.  In  like  manner,  there 
is  no  evidence  in  Scripture  of  any  commixture  of  the  properties  of 
the  two  natures  in  the  Saviour's  person,  having  ever  occurred  as  the 
result  of  this  union.     Although  it  existed  during  his  entire  life  on 


PERSON    AND    WORK   OF    CHRIST.  89 

earth,  his  human  nature  always  retained  all  the  ordinar\'  properties 
of  humanity;  whilst  the  numerous  miracles  which  the  Saviour 
wrought  are  ascribed  not  to  his  humanity,  but  to  the  one  divine 
person,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Nor  do  they  inform  us  that  his  di- 
vine nature  ate  bread  and  fish,  or  walked  and  slept.  In  short,  the 
human  nature  of  Christ  is  just  as  purely  human  as  though  the  di- 
vine had  never  been  connected  with  it ;  and  the  divine  as  purely 
divine  as  that  of  God  the  Father,  who  never  became  incarnate. 

The  human  mind,  moreover,  naturally  judges  the  creature  to  be 
essentially  different  from  the  Creator,  the  finite  from  the  infinite, 
and  the  very  idea  of  the  one  being  commuted  into  the  other,  either 
in  part  or  whole,  is  judged  by  the  mind  of  man  to  involve  contra- 
diction. Else  would  the  veneration  and  respect  due  to  good  men 
and  to  angels  not  differ  in  kind  from  that  which  we  pay  to  God,  but 
only  in  degree.  Then,  also,  would  the  ancient  apotheosis  of  heroes, 
and  the  modern  worship  of  saints  and  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  involve 
in  them  nothing  intrinsically  unreasonable. 

The  Council  of  Chalcedon,  in  A.  D.  451,  expressed  this  doctrine 
in  terms  which  have  been  satisfactory  to  the  Christian  Church  until 
this  day. 

"  He  is  one  Christ,  existing  in  two  natures  without  mixture 
(d(Ti';^-i'-wc),  without  change  {'arpk-Tu^,  without  division  (oJm//3E76Jc), 
without  separation  (a^wp/ff-^f) — the  diversity  of  the  two  natures  not 
being  at  all  destroyed  by  their  union  in  the  person ;  but  the  pecu- 
liar properties  (ij/tj-w)  of  each  nature  being  preserved,  and  concur- 
ring to  one  person  (ttpoctw-ov),  and  one  subsistence  {i'-oa-aaa^y  From 
this  view  it  is  evident  that  the  so-called  doctrine  of  Couwiunicatio 
idioniatuni,  or  Interchange  of  attributes,  between  the  divine  and  hu- 
man natures  of  the  Godman,  is  incorrect  and  unscriptural. 

5.  That  the  attributes  and  actions  of  both  natures,  icJdcJi  are  tlius 
affirvied  of  the  one  person,  do  really  all  belong  to  that  person. 

That  the  Scriptures  do  thus  habitually  ascribe  attributes,  taken 
both  from  the  human  and  divine  nature  of  the  Godman,  Jesus 
Christ,  we  have  shown  already  by  the  two  classes  of  texts,  one 
of  which  proves  the  divinity  and  the  other  the  humanity  of  the 
Saviour.  That  these  various  properties  do  appertain  to  this  one 
Theanthropic  person,  not  by  mere  figure  of  speech,  but  in  logical 
verity,  by  the  divinely  constituted  relations  of  this  supernatural 
personage,  is  also  evident  from  the  language  itself 


90  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

We  affirm,  not  that  the  properties  and  actions  of  either  nature 
are  attributed  in  Scripture  to  the  opposite  nature ;  but  to  the  one 
Theanthropic/t7'i'(?;;,  to  the  Godman,  whose  name  represents  both 
natures,  and  whose  being  is  made  up  of  neither  alone,  but  of  both 
together.  Just  as  when  we  say  James  walks,  we  do  not  regard  the 
act  as  belonging  merely  to  the  body,  with  which  the  mind  has  no 
connection;  but  at  once  regard  it  as  an  act  of  the  person,  which 
may  be  connected  with  important  motives  in  the  mind,  or  may  form 
a  part  of  a  plan  of  action  seated  wholly  in  the  mind,  concerning 
which  the  body  knows  nothing.  In  short,  we  refer  the  action  to  the 
person  James. 

The  intrinsic  nature  of  this  personal  or  hypostatic  union,  God  has 
nowhere  explained  to  us  in  his  word,  so  that  we  are  neither  able 
nor  called  on  to  explain  it.  It  is  just  as  inexplicable  as  the  union  of 
soul  and  body  in  man.  The  theory  that  the  two  natures  have  but 
one  consciousness,  is  not  affirmed  in  Scripture,  and  seems  to  militate 
against  the  completeness  of  the  Saviour's  humanity.  Nor  is  the 
theory  necessary.  It  is  the  fact  taught  in  Scripture,  of  God's  having 
combined  the  two  natures  into  one  person,  thus  for  wise  reasons 
forming  a  new  person,  consisting  of  the  Divine  Logos  and  a  human 
nature,  which  makes  the  attributes  of  both  natures  predicable  of 
this  one  person;  and  not  the  denial  of  a  human  consciousness.  And 
it  is  the  fact  that  the  inspired  volume  does  thus  ascribe  attributes 
derived  from  both  natures  to  this  one  person,  that  makes  it  obliga- 
tory upon  us  to  believe  the  doctrine.  Every  action,  human  and 
divine,  ascribed  to  the  Saviour  in  Scripture,  either  by  himself  orthe 
inspired  apostles,  must  therefore  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  his 
person,  to  himself:  and  as  proceeding  from,  or  performed  by  that 
nature,  either  human  or  divine,  to  whose  well-known  properties  it 
is  appropriate.  Thus,  in  John  xvi.  28,  the  Saviour  affirms,  "I  came 
from  the  Father,  and  came  into  the  world."  Now  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe,  as  the  early  Socinians  did,  that  the  human  nature  of 
Jesus  ever  existed  before  his  birth  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  when  the 
Logos  or  Word  became  flesh,  that  is,  assumed  our  nature,  and  that 
it  had  been  taken  to  heaven  and  returned  again.  Therefore  it  must 
have  been  his  divine  nature  that  came  from  the  Father,  where  it 
had  existed  in  glory  from  eternity.  And  when  the  Scriptures  de- 
clare that  Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world  "not  to  condemn  the 
world,  but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved," — that  "the 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  9I 

Son  of  man  came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many," — "that  he 
bore  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,"  &c. — it  would  be  the 
height  of  absurdit)'  to  suppose,  that  this  great  atoning  and  redeem- 
ing work,  of  which  prophets  had  spoken  thousands  of  years  before, 
and  for  which  the  Son  of  God  assumed  our  passible  nature,  that  he 
might  be  able  to  suffer,  should  be  regarded  as  having  nothing  to  do 
with  him  at  last,  and  as  being  the  act  merely  of  that  human  nature, 
which  was  ignorant  of  the  plan  and  purpose  until  after  the  incarna- 
tion. No,  the  sufferings  were  those  of  the  Theaiitliropic  person, 
whose  most  important  nature  was  divine.  Hence  it  may  be  justly 
said  He  (God)  purchased  his  Church  with  his  own  blood.  Had  the 
suffering  belonged  to  the  human  nature  alone,  then  did  God  not 
send  his  Son  into  the  world  to  suffer  and  to  die  for  us:  but  merely 
to  select  a  different  being,  the  mere  son  of  Mary,  to  do  so!  Then 
also  did  the  Son  of  God  not  come  into  the  world  to  give  Ins  life  a 
ransom  for  all,  but  to  induce  a  human  being  to  make  the  sacrifice. 
But  in  all  these  passages  these  vicarious  atoning  sufferings  and  ac- 
tions are  evidently  affirmed  of  the  Saviour,  of  the  Theanthropic 
person. 

Throughout  the  animal  creation  every  action  or  passion,  per- 
formed or  suffered  by  any  organ  or  part  of  the  animal,  is  naturally 
ascribed  to  the  whole  being,  is  regarded  not  as  simply  a  matter  of 
the  animal's  body,  but  of  his  entire  being;  and  our  interest  and  sym- 
pathy are  proportioned  to  the  degree  of  intelligence,  sagacity  and 
worthiness  we  suppose  it  to  possess.  Again,  in  man,  it  is  his  body 
that  makes  him  capable  of  suffering  injury  from  external  physical 
violence;  for  the  soul  can  neither  be  cut  with  the  sword  nor  pene- 
trated by  a  ball.  Yet,  when  injury  is  thus  done  to  the  body,  it  is 
the  mind  whicli  is  the  real  seat  of  sensation,  and  which  is  the  part 
that  suffers.  But  whether  the  sufferings  of  man  proceed  from  cor- 
poreal or  mental  causes,  whether  they  are  inflicted  on  the  body  or 
the  mind,  they  are,  by  the  laws  of  our  mental  constitution,  attributed 
to  the  person,  to  that  name  which  represents  both  parts  of  the  one 
being. 

Thus,  also,  must  we  naturally  suppose,  that  in  this  supernatural, 
complex  personage,  the  Godman,  all  the  acts  of  both  his  constituent 
natures  elo  really  belong  to  the  one  person,  and  must  in  propriet}'  be 
predicated  of  it,  and  not  distinctively  of  either  nature.  Hence  the 
sufferings  of  the  blessed  Saviour,  in  the  Garden  and  on  the  Cross, 


92  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

both  bodily  and  mental,  were  really  and  truly  the  sufferings  of  the 
one  being,  the  Godman,  the  Theanthropos,  the  Son  of  God  and  son 
of  man,  and  not  of  the  divine  nature  alone,  as  Osiander  taught,  or 
of  the  human  alone,  as  Stancar  supposed.  And  as  the  divine  nature 
is  the  real  personal  basis  of  the  Godman,  and  is  infinitely  more  ex- 
alted and  important  than  the  humanity,  it  must  sustain  the  more 
potential  part  in  the  complex  being,  and  the  sufferings  of  the  The- 
anthropos appertain  at  least  as  much  to  the  divine  nature  as  to  the 
human,  and  possess  an  influence  and  dignity  commensurate  rather 
with  the  divine  than  human,  they  must  be  rather  infinite  than  finite! 
The  plan  of  the  great  work  of  Redemption  and  its  gradual  revela- 
tion, as  well  as  the  preparation  of  the  Church  and  the  world  for  it 
through  four  thousand  years,  was  entirely  the  work  of  God;  but  in 
its  actual  execution,  the  human  nature  of  the  Saviour  co-operated 
and  served  as  the  organism,  through  which  the  Logos  (Word)  com- 
municated with  men,  and  was  enabled  to  suffer  and  die  in  our  stead 
and  for  our  redemption.  It  was  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  the  second 
person  of  the  Trinity,  who  voluntarily  undertook  the  work  of  re- 
deeming the  fallen  race  of  Adam.  It  was  the  Son  of  God,  who, 
soon  after  the  Fall,  announced  his  intention,  as  "  the  seed  of  the 
woman,"  to  bruise  the  Serpent's  head.  It  was  the  Son  of  God  who 
from  age  to  age  revealed  one  feature  after  another  of  the  plan  of 
Redemption  through  the  prophets,  until  the  entire  scheme  was  fully 
presented,  though  imperfectly  understood  by  the  carnal  Jews,  who 
expected  a  temporal  kingdom  of  heaven.  It  was  the  Son  of  God 
who  directed  the  circumstances  of  his  own  incarnation,  the  miracu- 
lous conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  birth  of  her  Son.  It 
was  the  Son  of  God  who  united  himself  with  the  miraculously  con- 
ceived human  being  before  his  birth,  and  therefore,  before  he  had 
yet  lived  on  earth  or  attained  a  separate  personality.  It  was  the 
Son  of  God  who  determined  aforehand  the  circumstances  of  the 
Saviour's  birth.  And  it  was  the  Son  of  God  who  in  general  deter- 
mined the  sphere  in  which  the  human  nature  of  the  Saviour,  in  the 
full  exercise  of  his  will,  and  in  connection  with  the  divine  nature, 
together  constituting  the  Theanthropic  person,  should  co-operate  in 
executing  the  work  of  redeeming  love.  As  the  human  nature  of 
the  Saviour  was  to  be  complete  and  real,  in  all  things,  sin  excepted, 
the  Theanthropos  withheld  {kavT6v  kxevwae)  the  manifestations  of  the 
divine  nature,  through  the  infancy  and  youth  of  Jesus,  and  left  him 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  93 

to  his  natural  and  proper  development,  until  the  necessities  of  his 
public  ministry  called  for  the  exercise  of  his  higher  powers.  This 
circumstance  gave  rise  to  what  the  Form  of  Concord  terms  the  tivo- 
fold  state  of  Christ  {status  exinanitionis  et  exaltationis\  designated 
by  later  divines,  the  Saviour's  state  of  liiimiliation  and  of  exaltation, 
Rom.  viii.  3 ;  Philip,  ii.  6-1 1 ;  Acts  v.  30;  ii.  33-36. 

What  a  glorious  view  does  this  doctrine  afford,  of  the  all- suffi- 
cient basis  of  the  great  work  of  atonement  and  redemption,  of  the 
all-prevailing  righteousness,  the  vicarious  sufferings  and  death  of 
the  Redeemer  !  What  power  is  there  in  the  declaration  of  Scrip- 
ture, that  not  a  mere  man,  but  God  so  loved  the  world,  as  to  send 
his  only-begotten  Son  into  the  world,  not  to  condemn  the  world, 
but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved  !  And  again,  The 
blood  of  Christ  (the  Son  of  God,  the  Godman)  cleaiisctJi  us  from  all 
sin  ! 

In  conclusion,  it  is  gratifying  to  find  this  view  of  our  subject, 
which  we  have  found  so  clearly  deducible  from  the  teachings  of 
God's  word,  taught  with  great  confidence  and  perspicuity  by  that 
greatest  of  Reformers,  Martin  Luther  himself: 

"  If  it  should  be  objected  (says  he)  on  the  ground  of  reason,  that 
the  Godhead  cannot  suffer  nor  die,  you  must  answer.  That  is  true  ; 
nevertheless,  as  the  divinity  and  humanity  in  Christ  constitute  one 
person,  therefore  the  Scrjptures,  on  account  of  this  personal  unity, 
also  attribute  everything  to  the  Deity  which  occurred  to  the 
humanity,  and  vice  versa.  This  is  moreover  accordant  with  truth  ; 
for  you  must  affirm  that  the  person  (Christ)  suffers  and  dies.  Now 
the  person  is  the  true  God,  therefore  it  is  proper  to  say,  the  Son  of 
God  suffers.  For  although  one  part  (if  I  may  so  speak),  namely, 
the  GodJicad  does  not  suffer,  still,  the  person,  which  is  God,  suffers 
in  its  other  part,  that  is,  /;/  its  humanity  (denn  obwohl  das  eine  Stuck 
[dasz  ich  so  rede]  als  die  Gottheit  nicht  leidet ;  so  leidet  dennoch 
die  Person,  welch  Gott  ist,  am  andern  Stiicke,  als  an  der  Mensch- 
heit).  Thus  we  say.  The  king's  son  has  a  sore,  and  yet  it  is  only 
his  leg  that  is  affected  ;  Solomon  is  wise,  and  yet  it  is  only  his  soul 
which  possesses  wisdom  ;  Absalom  is  beautiful,  and  yet  it  was  only 
his  body  that  was  referred  to  ;  Peter  is  gray,  and  yet  it  is  only  his 
head  of  which  this  is  affirmed.  For  as  soul  and  body  constitute 
but  one  person,  everything  which  happens  either  to  the  body  or  the 
soul,  yea,  even  to  the  smallest  member  of  the   body,  is  justly  and 


94  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

properly  attributed  to  the  whole  person.  This  mode  of  expression 
is  not  peculiar  to  the  Scriptures,  but  prevails  througlioiit  the  zvorld, 
and  is  also  correct.  Thus  the  Son  of  God  was  in  truth  crucified  for 
us,  that  is,  the  person  which  is  God  ;  for  this  person,  I  say,  zvas  cru- 
cified according  to  its  humanity. '^ — Lnth.  Works,  Jena  edit.,  vol.  3, 
P-457- 

SOTERIOLOGY. 

We  have  thus  arrived  at  the  third  grand  doctrine  of  our  Article, 
its  Soteriology. 

Let  us  hear  the  language  of  the  Article  on  this  subject : 

"  Who  (namely,  the  Christ,)  truly  suffered,  zvas  crucified,  died,  ajid 
was  buried,  that  he  might  reconcile  the  Father  to  us,  and  be  a  sacrifice 
not  only  for  original  sin,  but  also  for  all  the  actual  sins  of  men.''' 

The  merits  of  Christ,  which  form  the  basis  of  Christian  Soter- 
iology, have  been  variously  divided.  The  earliest  classification  is 
that  which  separates  his  activities  into  those  of  prophet,  priest,  and 
king,  found  as  early  as  the  time  of  Eusebius,  in  the  fourth  century.* 
The  other  and  more  natural  division  is  into  the  active  and  passive 
righteousness  of  the  Redeemer,  the  former  including  all  the  actions 
of  his  life  in  fulfilment  of  the  divine  law  instead  of  the  sinner,  and 
the  latter  all  his  sufferings  as  well  as  death  in  his  behalf  We  shall, 
however,  adhere  to  the  more  ancient,  simple,  and  historical  arrange- 
ment of  the  Article  before  us. 

Here  we  find  three  items  indicated,  namely,  the  sufferings  and 
death  of  the  Saviour  as  matters  of  history,  their  necessity,  their 
vicarious  nature,  and  lastly  the  manner  in  which  they  effect  the  con- 
templated end. 

I.  The  Sufferings  and  Death  of  Christ  as  Matters  of  History. 

I,  The  historical  verity  of  the  Saviour's  sufferings  and  death  is  so 
manifestly  and  irresistibly  evident  from  the  simple  yet  detailed  and 
impartial  narratives  of  the  synoptical  gospels,  that  it  has  been  gen- 
erally admitted  both  by  Jews  and  Christians.  See  Matt.  xxvi.  and 
xxvii.;  Mark  xiv.  and  xv.,  and  Luke  xxii.  and  xxiii.  To  specify 
these  evidences  would  require  the  rehearsal  of  the  entire  chapters. 

*  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.  I.,  C.  3.  <^<r  tovtov^  dTravrae  t7/v  Ltvi  tov  okTjdt]  xP'^tov 
ava<popav  kxetv,  fiovon  apxi£p£a  tuv  6XuVj  x^-'-  f'Oi'ov  awaarjg-  tt/-  ;t;ri(7fw^  jiaaiT^ea,  x^^^ 
fiovov  Trpo(pt}T'>jv,  apxiTTpofT/Ti/v  TOV  irarpog-  Tvyxavovra. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  95 

The  Docetce  alone,  a  species  of  incipient  Gnostic,  volatilized  the 
Saviour's  human  nature  into  a  mere  phantasm,  and  denied  that  he 
had  a  real  body,  thus  of  course  rejecting  the  reality  of  his  sufferings 
upon  the  cross.  Mohammed  also  ventured  to  deny  it,  under  the 
ridiculous  pretext  that  Christ  was  withdrawn  and  a  Jew  was  crucified 
in  his  stead.  Some  modern  Rationalists  and  infidels  have  impugned 
it,  adopting  the  principle  of  exegesis  that  miracles  being,  in  their 
judgment,  impossible,  no  interpretation  of  any  Scripture  passage 
can  be  correct  which  implies  or  affirms  one.  They  have  accord- 
ingly denied  the  reality  of  Christ's  death,  in  order  to  disprove  the 
truth  of  a  resurrection  in  his  case.  But  their  utter  destitution  of  all 
historical  evidence,  in  view  of  the  detailed  and  generally  accredited 
gospel  narratives,  has  prevented  the  reception  of  their  theory  even 
among  the  practical  neglecters  of  religion. 

2.  The  magnitude  of  the  Saviour's  sufferings  is  evident  from  the 
narratives  of  the  gospel,  in  which  a  series  of  indignities  and  cruel- 
ties are  detailed  such  as  are  rarely  inflicted  on  the  greatest  male- 
factors. Yet  it  has  been  the  prevailing  opinion  of  the  Church  in 
all  ages  that  his  greatest  sufferings  were  mental  and  internal.  Thev 
must  have  included  sorrow  on  account  of  the  sins  of  all  mankind 
in  all  ages.  By  these  sins  indignity  was  offered  to  the  infinitely 
good  and  glorious  Father  in  heaven,  the  honor  of  this  law  was  con- 
stantly violated  by  men  on  earth,  and  all  men  were  encouraged  to 
indulge  their  sinful  propensities,  involving  the  human  race  in  con- 
tinual rebellion  against  the  best  benefactor  and  God,  as  well  as 
entailing  on  themselves  eternal  ruin.  Of  all  this  the  Saviour  had 
a  more  perfect  knowledge  than  any  mere  human  being  over  could 
have.  A  deep  sense  of  the  displeasure  of  his  heavenly  Father  for 
the  assumed  guilt  of  the  world  also  evidently  bore  with  incalculable 
weight  upon  his  soul,  for  the  immediate  hand  of  God  pressed  this 
heavy  load  upon  his  heart  so  that  he  was  constrained  to  e.xclaim, 
"  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me." 

These  sources  of  suffering  alone  would  have  far  transcended  the 
powers  of  endurance  of  any  mere  man,  and  constrain  us  to  resort 
to  the  peculiarity  of  his  person  for  explanation.  This  union  of  the 
two  natures  in  one  person  involves  the  inference  that  the  sufferings 
were  not  those  of  his  human  nature  alone,  but  of  his  Theanthropic 
person,  of  the  Godman.  So  that  the  divinity  of  \\\'i  person  not  only 
gave  him  infinitely  greater  power  to  endure  the  inconceivable  pains 


96  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

inflicted  by  the  Father  on  account  of  the  dishonor  entailed  upon  his 
law,  but  it  also  gave  to  the  sufferings  of  that  Godman  infinitely 
greater  atoning  and  reconciling  efficacy  than  could  have  belonged  to 
any  merely  human  being.  Thus  it  is  an  obvious  principle  of  human 
judgment  that  the  same  wound,  made  in  the  body  of  a  horse  and  a 
man,  is  possessed  of  very  different  degrees  of  importance  and  in- 
fluence. The  sensibility  of  the  horse  is  less  acute  than  that  of  the 
man.  The  brute,  moreover,  suffers  simply  the  pain  caused  by  the 
lesion  of  his  body,  whilst  the  rational  reflecting  man,  in  addition 
to  that  naked  pain  of  the  wound,  experiences  much  greater  suffer- 
ing from  his  knowledge  of  the  various  consequences  which  these 
pains  will  produce  to  him  and  toothers.  And  finally  the  z;/;^«zV^ 
dignity  of  his  Theanthropic  person  confers  infinite  efficacy  on  all  his 
actions  and  sufferings  to  accomplish  the  end  for  which  they  were 
performed  and  endured. 

II.  The  necessity  of  these  sitfferings  of  the  Saviour,  is  already 
presupposed  by  the  several  facts,  that  when  the  love  of  God  in- 
duced him  to  provide  for  the  salvation  of  our  sinful  race,  God  him- 
self proposed  this,  and  no  other  method  of  salvation,  "  not  sparing 
even  his  own  Son,"  which  he  would  have  done  if  the  sacrifice  had 
been  unnecessary — that  the  Son  of  God  was  willing  to  make  the 
mournful,  bloody  sacrifice — and  that  the  Father  approved  his  as- 
sumption of  the  mission  by  a  voice  from  heaven,  "This  is  my 
beloved  Son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased." 

But  "  that  without  the  shedding  of  blood  there  could  be  no  re- 
mission of  sin,"  is  further  evident  from  the  essential  attributes,  the 
punitive  justice  and  holiness  of  God.  The  divine  favor  is  life,  and  his 
loving  kindness  better  than  life.  But  that  Being,  who  delights  in 
holiness,  who  has  made  all  the  powers  of  his  rational  creatures,  and 
all  the  organizations  of  physical  nature  around  them  productive  of 
pleasure,  and  has  inscribed  on  the  structure  of  the  universe  around 
us,  the  law  that  virtne  is  productive  of  happiness  and  vice  of  misery 
— that  God  cannot  continue  to  bestow  his  favor  on  the  impenitent, 
persistent  transgressor  of  his  law,  but  sooner  or  later  must  with- 
draw it,  and  that  withdrawal  involves  eternal  banishment  from  his 
presence  into  the  regions  of  endless  darkness  and  despair. 

Moreover,  God  being  the  moral  Governor  of  the  universe,  and 
having  given  to  his  rational  creatures  laws  infinitely  wise  and  cal- 
culated to  secure  their  highest  happiness,  it  is  evidently  his  supreme 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  97 

legislative  duty  to  maintain  the  honor  of  his  law,  on  which  the 
security  and  happiness  of  all  his  faithful  subjects  depend,  by  pun- 
ishing the  transgression  of  them,  either  in  the  person  of  each  crim- 
inal, or  on  a  substitute,  or  by  exhibiting  in  some  other  way  his  in- 
violable hatred  to  sin,  thus  to  deter  others  from  transgression.  What 
judgment  would  we  form  of  a  human  governor  who,  having  enacted 
wise  and  salutary  laws,  should  neglect  to  enforce  obedience  to  them; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  should  suffer  the  rights  and  security  of  person 
and  property  to  be  violated  with  impunity?  Now  the  infinite  Je- 
hovah, having  determined  on  this  plan  of  salvation,  by  the  suffer- 
ings and  death  of  his  own  Son  upon  the  cross,  we  must  regard 
the  plan  as  consonant  with  his  nature,  and  as  satisfactory  to  the 
demands  of  the  violated  law.  We  are  therefore  compelled  to  re- 
gard these  sufferings  of  the  Godman  as  absolutely  necessary,  unless 
God  would  abdicate  the  throne  of  the  universe,  or  divest  himself 
of  those  essential  attributes  in  consequence  of  which  "he  is  angry 
with  the  wjcked  every  day,"  Ps.  vii.  ii,  and  "the  thoughts  of  the 
wicked  are  an  abomination  in  his  sight,"  Ps.  xv.  26,  and  "  without 
holiness  no  man  shall  see  God." 

Evidently  then,  the  theory  of  Grotius,  that  the  necessity  of  an 
atonement  was  only  hypothetical,  being  caused  by  the  fact  that  God 
had  pitblisJicd  a  laiv  threatening  punishment  to  sinners,  and  that  had 
he  not  done  so,  he  might  have  pardoned  sin  without  any  atonement 
or  satisfaction  if  he  had  seen  fit  to  do  so,  is  a  radical  error,  ignoring 
the  essential  holiness,  ju.stice  and  benevolence  of  God,  and  attribut- 
ing mutability  to  "him  in  whom  there  is  no  variableness  nor  the 
shadow  of  a  change." 

III.      Their  Vicarious  Nature  mid  Necessity. 

In  perusing  the  numberless  declarations  of  the  inspired  volume 
touching  the  wonderful  sufferings  of  the  Godman  in  the  work  of 
Redemption,  we  are  forcibly  struck  with  the  frequencj^  and  the 
variety  of  expression,  in  which  their  vicarious  nature  is  held  up  to 
view.  The  holy  seer,  Isaiah,  who  had  been  describing  the  INIessiah 
and  his  kingdom,  says:  "  He  was  wounded /<?/'  oiir  transgressions, 
he  was  bruised  /<?;-  our  iniquities;  the  chastisement  of  our  ^tt^cQ  was 
upon  him,  and  icitli  Jus  stripes  Xi'c  are  healed."  "All  we  like  sheep 
have  gone  astray,  we  have  turned  every  one  to  his  own  way:  and 
the  Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  iniquities  of  us  all,"  Isaiah  Ini.  5,  6. 
The  apostle  Peter  says,  "  Who  (namely  Christ)  his  own  self  bare 


98  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

oitr  sins  in  Ins  ozvn  body  on  the  tree — by  whose  stripes  ye  were 
healed."  And  the  greatest  of  the  apostles,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians  (iii.  13),  testifies,  "  Christ  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the 
law,  being  made  a  curse  for  ?/j."  "  The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,"  says 
John,  ''cleanses  us  from  all  sin."  In  the  Apocalypse,  ascriptions  of 
praise  are  given  to  Jesus  Christ,  as  "  to  him  that  loved  us  and  washed 
us  from  our  sins  in  Jus  own  blood,"  Rev.  i.  5.  And  to  the  Romans, 
Paul  says,  "  When  we  were  enemies,  we  were  reconciled  to  God  by 
the  death  of  his  Son,"  v.  10,  and  to  the  Corinthians  (2  Cor.  v.  18, 
19)  "  God  reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given  us 
the  ministry  of  reconciliation;  namely,  that  God  was  in  Christ  re- 
conciling the  world  unto  himself" 

Thus  we  see  that  the  method  selected  by  infinite  wisdom  to  re- 
deem our  fallen  race,  is  through  the  actions,  sufferings,  and  death  of 
the  Godnian.  Had  pardon  been  promised  on  the  grounci  of  any- 
thing that  any  mere  man  had  done,  or  had  Jesus  Christ  been  a  mere 
man,  his  life  and  death  would  have  not  only  lacked  the  necessary 
efficacy  or  redeeming  power,  from  want  of  proper  dignity  of  his  per- 
son; but  his  efforts  could  only  tend  to  excite  in  the  sinner  gratitude 
to  liim,  and  not  to  God.  But  as  the  work  was  effected  by  the  Thean- 
thropic  miraculous  person,  the  Godman,  in  whom  the  human  and 
divine  natures  are  combined,  and  the  divine  even  preponderated, 
the  acts,  sufferings  and  death  of  this  divine  personage  not  only  pos- 
sess divine  efficacy,  but  are  also  directly  calculated  to  excite  in  the 
hearts  of  redeemed  sinners  love  and  gratitude  unbounded  to  the 
divine  Redeemer,  to  God. 

All  these  inspired  declarations  accord  with  the  view  more  gener- 
ally prevailing  in  all  ages  of  the  Church  and  bring  us  to 

IV.  TJie  Manner  in  which  the  Sufferings  and  Death  of  the  Godnian, 
yesus  Christ,  were  designed  to  effect  our  Salvation. 

From  the  very  dawn  of  Christianity,  primitive  believers  and 
Christian  fathers  regarded  the  work  of  the  Godman,  and  especially 
his  death,  as  in  some  way  the  procuring  cause  of  salvation  to  the 
fallen  race  of  Adam.  But  the  development  of  the  expiatory  work 
of  Christ,  as  a  distinct  satisfaction  made  by  the  Godman  to  the  de- 
mands of  penal  justice,  and  of  the  manner  in  which  it  affects  the  re- 
lations of  the  sinner  to  the  law  of  God,  was  more  tardy  than  that  of 
Anthropology  and  Theology,  as  well  as  of  some  other  less  impor- 
tant doctrines. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  99 

The  Gnostics  (Rasilides,  A.  D.  125)  who  taught  a  mere  spectral 
humanity  in  connection  with  the  Logos,  and  the  Ebionites,  who 
denied  all  connection  between  God  and  man  in  Christ,  virtually 
rejected  the  atonement.  The  earliest  fathers,  in  opposition  to  these 
heretics,  taught,  though  not  with  equal  perspicuity,  that  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  Saviour  were  not  the  sufferings  of  a  mere  man,  but  of 
the  Godman,  and  were  expiatory  of  the  guilt  of  our  fallen  race. 

The  visionary  Origcn,  of  the  third  century,  understood  the  death 
of  the  Saviour  in  a  mystic  and  idealistic  sense,  as  an  event  not 
limited  to  this  visible  world,  nor  to  one  single  period  of  time.  He 
viewed  it  as  occurring  in  heaven  as  well  as  on  earth,  as  embracing  all 
ages,  and,  in  its  consequences,  of  infinite  importance  for  other 
worlds.*  Origen,  therefore,  could  not  view  the  atonement  as  vicar- 
ious, because  he  regarded  all  punishment  as  disciplinary  and  not 
judicial,  as  temporary  and  not  eternal,  and  considered  souls  as  con- 
stantly falling  and  being  reclaimed.  Yet  sometimes  he  speaks  of 
the  atonement  as  expiatory. 

In  the  t/uj'd  century,  and  in  a  few  instances  even  earlier,  some  of 
the  Christian  fathers,  by  misinterpreting  several  passages  of  Scripture, 
as  Col.  ii.  15,  Heb.  xi.  14,  and  still  retaining  the  Jewish  and  Oriental 
idea  of  the  great  influence  of  Satan  and  evil  spirits,  gave  currency 
to  the  erroneous  opinion  that  mankind  since  the 'fall  were  not  only 
subject  to  temptation  from  Satan  and  other  evil  spirits,  as  the  Scrip- 
tures teach  ;  but  literally  under  his  constant  control.  Hence  they 
misunderstood  the  passages  teaching  that  Christ  laid  down  his  life 
a  sacrifice  for  us,  or  for  sin,  as  though  the  sacrifice  or  ransom  had 
been  made  to  Satan  instead  of  to  God  ;  and  that  the  result  of 
redemption  was  not  to  reconcile  us  to  God,  so  much  as  to  deliver 
us  from  the  supposed  absolute  servitude  to  Satan. 

This  theory,  first  adopted  in  the  Greek  Church,  in  the  third  cen- 
tury, especially  by  Origen,  and  later  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  was  transplanted  to  the  Latin  Church,  and 
adopted  by  Ambrose,  and  even  in  some  degree  also  by  Augustine. 
This  erroneous  view  generally  prevailed  in  the  Papal  Church  until 
the  twelfth  century,  and  formed  a  very  congenial  auxiliary  to  the 
superstitions  and  formalism  of  Rome. 

After  some  centuries  of  comparative  darkness,  and  in  the  begin- 

*  'Ov  fiovov  VTrep  avdpuTTuv  ciTveftavev,  a?J.a  Kai  v~ep  tojv  7.onruv  ?.o)'<;t;6Ji'. 


lOO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ning  of  the  scholastic  period,  the  true  doctrine  of  a  vicarious  atone- 
mait,  which  had  been  presented  in  a  general  and  popular  way  by  the 
early  fathers,  and  whose  systematic  relations  had  been  touched  on 
by  Athanasius  and  John  Damascenus,  was  fully  taught  by  Anschn, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  1093  (born  1034,  died  about  1109). 
He  represented  it  as  a  wonderful  scheme  of  divine  love  and  mercy, 
devised  in  the  councils  of  eternity,  to  redeem  our  fallen  race  from 
the  dominion  and  curse  of  sin.  This  theory  assumes  that  man  is 
under  natural  obligation  of  obedience  to  the  laws  of  God,  the  viola- 
tion of  which  created  a  debt,  which  is  sin,  and  for  which  satisfaction 
must  be  made  to  the  punitive  justice  of  God.  This  punishment 
must  be  endured,  either  by  the  sinner  himself,  or  by  his  substitute. 
The  justice  of  God  demanded  a  sacrifice,  and  the  benevolence  of  God 
furnished  the  victim,  by  the  surrender  of  his  own  Son,  who  volun- 
tarily offered  himself  a  ransom  for  our  sinful  race.  This  view  of 
the  case  is  argued  with  consummate  dialectic  skill  by  Anselm,  in 
in  his  work  entitled  Cur  Dc?is  homo  f  The  depravity  of  man  being 
premised,  the  necessity  of  a  satisfaction,  before  pardon  could  be 
extended  to  the  sinner,  is  traced  to  the  punitive  justice  of  God,  as 
moral  governor  of  the  world.  From  the  inability  of  the  sinner,  or 
of  any  other  mere  creature,  to  do  more  than  the  law  requires  for 
himself,  he  deduces  the  necessity,  that  the  Redeemer  must  be  more 
than  a  creature — must  be  one  who  did  not  himself  owe  any  debt  of 
obedience,  and  therefore  he  must  be  divine.  As  the  satisfaction  was 
to  be  for  man,  man  also  should  participate  in  it :  therefore  the  Re- 
deemer should  be  both  God  and  man,  should  be  Theanthropos.  The 
sufferings  of  the  Godman  being  infinite,  they  were  amply  sufficient 
to  satisfy  for  all  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  An  additional  reason 
why  the  Logos  assumed  human  nature,  was  because  as  God  alone 
he  could  not  suffer,  but  was  impassible :  or  in  other  words,  it  was 
necessary  that  the  Redeemer  should  be  man,  that  he  might  be  able 
to  suffer  for  us,  and  be  God,  that  his  sufferings  might  have  efficacy 
to  redeem  us.* 

*S&&  the  aiUihor's  "Evangelical  Lutheran  Catechism,'"  p.  62.  Q.  152.  "Are 
we  able  to  make  this  satisfaction  ourselves?  A.  No;  we  cannot  of  ourselves 
even  repent  of  our  sins,  and  if  by  divine  grace  we  are  converted,  our  best  ser- 
vices are  so  imperfect  as  not  to  merit  acceptance  even  for  the  present ;  much 
less  can  our  good  works  at  any  time  exceed  the  demands  of  the  law,  and  make 
satisfaction  for  past  sins. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  Id 

Other  prominent  writers  fluctuated  between  the  different  systems. 
Abelard  {d'xcd  1 142)  viewed  the  atonement  as  purely  a  work  of  be- 
nevoioice,  not  required  by  the  attributes  of  God  as  a  condition  of 
pardon;  repentance  itself  being  regarded  as  a  sufficient  basis  for  it. 
His  views  of  sin,  and  of  the  divine  holiness,  were  entirely  super- 
ficial. The  effects  of  the  Saviour's  suffering,  he  considered  as  purely 
suasivc,  designed  to  inspire  the  sinner  with  feelings  of  penitence. 
On  the  occurrence  of  these,  he  maintains,  God  can  pardon  the 
transgressor  without  any  equivalent  or  satisfoction  to  the  violated 
law.  Piter  Lombard,  in  the  main  preferred  the  theory  of  Abelard 
(t  1 164).  Bernard  of  Clairvaux  (f  1 153)  was  more  evangelical,  and 
inclined  to  the  Anselmic  theory. 

The  ScJiooluien,  especially  of  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centu- 
ries, such  as  Bonaventiira  (ti272),  Alexander  Hales  (1245),  have 
discussed  these  subjects  in  all  their  metaphysical,  as  well  as  prac- 
tical bearings,  with  consummate  ability.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the 
prince  of  scholastic  divines,  inculcated  the  same  views  of  the  work 
of  the  Godman  in  saving  our  sinful  race,  yet  with  increasing 
clearness  and  force,  especially  in  his  "  Snmnia  Theologies."  He 
discriminated  more  clearly  between  the  satisfaction  made  for  the 
sins  of  men  by  the  Saviour's  sufferings,  and  the  merit  of  his  obedi- 
ence to  the  law — that  is,  between  the  active  and  passive  righteousness 
of  Christ.  By  the  manner  in  which  he  teaches  the  superabundance 
of  Christ's  righteousnesss,  without  counterbalancing  it  by  the  infi- 
nite demerit  of  sin,  he  prepared  the  way  for  the  Romish  doctrine  of 
works  of  supererogation. 

TkI DENTINE    SoTERIOLOGV. 

In  close  connection  with  these  views  is  the  Tridentine  Soteriology, 
or  the  system  of  that  portion  of  the  Romish  Church  which  resisted 
the  light  of  the  Reformation,  merely  revising  and  confirming  the 
corrupt  system  developed  in  that  Church  through  the  lapse  of  ages. 
The  members  of  the  celebrated  Council  of  Trent,  convened  in  1545, 
were  employed,  with  various  intervals,  for  eighteen  years  (till  1 563), 
for  the  purpose  of  repairing  the  fearful  damage  done  their  doctrinal 

"Q-  I  S3-  Could  any  mere  creature  make  satisfaction  for  us  !  A.  No  ;  forno 
creature,  not  even  an  archangel,  could  bear  the  weight  of  God's  indignation  aj 
the  sins  of  the  world ;  nor  could  any  creature  perform  more  good  works  than 
the  law  requires  for  himself;  hence  none  of  them  could  be  applied  to  the  ben- 
efit of  others." 


I02  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

system  by  the  ever-memorable  Reformation,  and  decided  that  the 
merits  of  Christ  alone  are  not  the  ground  of  the  sinner's  salvation, 
but  in  connection  with  the  inward  holiness.  They  confound  justifi- 
cation with  sanctification,  as  Augustine  and  other  fathers  had  occa- 
sionally done. 

By  this  holiness  or  sanctification  the  Tridentine  doctors  under- 
stood, not  external  acts  of  holy  living,  but  an  internal  state,  or  act 
of  faith,  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  act  or  state  is  not  re- 
garded as  expiatory,  but  as  a  meritorious  work  of  man;  and  thus 
justification  is  in  part  by  works,  contrary  to  the  Scripture  declara- 
tion, "//  is  not  of  works,  lest  any  man  should  boast,"  Eph.  ii.  9. 
Justification  by  faith  alone  the  Romish  Church  condemns  in  un- 
equivocal terms.* 

Protestant  Soteriology. 

But  it  was  only  in  the  Protestant  Church,  and  especially  from  the 
pen  of  the  chief  Reformer,  Martin  Luther,  that  the  New  Testament 
doctrine  of  salvation  by  grace  alone,  without  works,  first  found  its 
most  lucid  and  ample  exhibition  in  this  era.  It  was  in  the  Protest- 
ant Church  that  the  primitive  lustre  of  this  apostolic  doctrine  was 
revived  in  all  its  amplitude,  and  pursued  through  its  different  rela- 
tions. The  Anselmic  view  related  mainly  to  the  objective  aspect  of 
the  atonement,  and  its  bearings  on  the  attributes  and  law  of  God  as 
moral  governor  of  the  universe,  whilst  its  application  to  the  penitent 
sinner,  his  justification,  was  less  carefully  elaborated.  The  path  of 
deep  practical  experience,  through  which  Providence  led  Luther  to 
a  solution  of  the  ^xohX&va,  Hoiv  can  man  be  just  with  God?  also 
directed  his  chief  attention  to  the  practical  and  subjective  aspects  of 
these  doctrines,  and  taught  him  to  feel  the  necessity  of  an  atonement 
for  our  actual  sins,  as  well  as  our  hereditary  depravity.  Hence  he 
and  his  followers  devoted  more  attention  to  the  discussion  of  subjec- 
tive justification  than  of  the  objective  atonement,  and  in  the  different 
leading  portions  of  the  Protestant  world  this  subject  was  fully  dis- 
cussed and  understood  in  its  several  relations. 

a.   Total  and  universal  depravity,  both  natural  or  hereditary  and  ac- 


■  *  "If  any  one  shall  say  that  justifying  faith  is  nothing  but  confidence  in  the 
divine  mercy,  remitting  sin  on  account  of  Christ,  or  that  this  faith  is  the  sole 
thing  by  which  we  are  justified  :  Let  him  be  accursed." — Canones  Concil.  Tri- 
dentin,  de  Justificatione,  IX.,  XI.,  XII. 


PERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRIST.  IO3 

tual,  became  the  established  doctrbie  of  Protestantism.  Our  fallen  race 
are  regarded  as  deeply  guilty  before  God,  and  yet  morally  unable  to 
effect  their  own  deliverance,  thus  exhibiting  the  absolute  necessity  of 
the  atonement. 

b.  The  vicarious  atoiicmoit  and  rigJitecnsness  of  the  Godman,  the 
Saviour,  are  regarded  as  the  ody  avadahie  plan  of  salvation  for  our 
race,  and  as  fully  sufficient  for  the  redemption  of  all  mankind. 

c.  And  a  living  faith  alone,  zvitJiont  ivorks,  is  regarded  as  the  only 
condition  on  zvJuch  tJie  benefits  of  tins  redemption  are  dispensed  to 
men.  This  faith,  wherever  found,  is  always  productive  of  good 
works.  It  works  by  love  and  purifies  the  heart  and  overcomes  the 
world.  It  produces  a  holy  life,  which  is,  however,  regarded  not  as 
a  part  of  the  condition  of  justification,  but  as  an  evidence  of  the 
genuineness  of  living  faith:  whilst  all  the  glory  of  our  salvation,  in 
time  and  eternity,  is  ascribed  to  that  Lamb  of  God  which  was  slain 
for  the  sins  of  the  world. 

ESCHATOLOGY    OF    ChRIST. 

The  remainder  of  our  Article  relates  to  what  may  be  termed  the 
Eschatology  of  the  Saviour,  his  Descent  into  hades  (drf7/f),  his  Resur- 
rection, his  Ascension  and  Return  to  Final  Judgment. 

On  these  remaining  topics,  interesting  indeed,  but  of  less  practical 
importance  than  those  which  have  claimed  our  attention,  want  of 
time  forbids  any  more  than  a  very  brief  notice. 

We  are  told,  "  He  descended  into  hell,"  or  hades,  the  place  of  de- 
parted spirits,  in  which  both  the  righteous  and  the  wicked  are  con- 
tained, separated  from  each  other,  indeed,  by  "an  impassable  gulf," 
yet  within  view  or  knowledge  of  each  other,  as  seen  in  the  case  of 
"the  rich  man"  and  "  Lazarus  afar  off  in  Abraham's  bosom."  It 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  this  clause,  which  our  Confession  quotes 
from  the  so-called  "Apostles'  Creed,"  is  not  found  in  the  copies 
extant  of  that  document  during  the  first  three  centuries.  But  the 
existence  of  such  an  intermediate  state,  termed  sheol  by  the  He- 
brews, and  hades  by  the  Greeks,  supposed  to  be  underground,  into 
which  both  the  righteous  and  wicked  descend  after  death,*  was 
generally  believed. 

Different  opinions  were  entertained  as  to  the  object,  for  which  the 

*  Numbers  xvi.  30,  33;  Isaiah  xiv.  15;  Ps.lv.  15;  Job  vii.  9. 


I04  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Godman  descended  to  hades.  The  Form  of  Concord  *  affirms  that 
Christ  descended  into  the  lower  regions,  destroyed  hell  for  believers, 
and  snatched  us  from  the  power  of  death  and  Satan,  and  thus  from 
the  jaws  of  hell.  Others  supposed  that  he  preached  the  gospel  in 
hades,  as  well  to  believers  who  had  lived  before  his  incarnation,  as 
also  to  the  wicked.  Others,  amongst  whom  was  also  Calvin,  f  that 
he  there  endured  the  pains  of  hell— dind  others  that  he  appeared 
there  to  announce  himself  as  conqueror  over  death  and  hell  (Holla- 
zius,  Quenstedt,  Buddeus).  Dr.  Mosheim  and  others  regarded  this 
doctrine  as  a  theological  problem  not  fully  solved  in  Scripture;  yet 
there  is  enough  revealed  to  show  that  it  is  a  part  of  the  Saviour's 
triumph  over  Satan,  in  the  prosecution  of  the  glorious  work  of 
redemption. 

Resurrection  of  the  Saviour. 

The  next  step  in  the  Saviour's  exaltation  is  his  Rcsiirrcction. 
''He  arose  on  the  third  day,''  says  our  Article.  According  to  the 
Jewish  method  of  calculation,  fractions  of  a  day  were  also  counted 
as  units,  and  days'  commenced  at  sunset.  Hence  the  Saviour  hav- 
ing been  crucified  on  Friday  about  noon,  the  after  part  of  the  day 
was  counted  a  whole  one,  Friday  night  and  Saturday  till  sunset 
were  the  second,  and  Saturday  night,  belonging,  according  to  the 
Jewish  mode  of  calculation,  to  Sunday,  together  with  Sunday 
morning,  was  the  third  day. 

Although  the  truth  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  has  been  dis- 
puted by  some  infidels,  ancient  and  modern,  its  historical  reality 
has  been  so  frequently  and  so  triumphantly  established,  that  it  has 
ceased  to  be  a  prominent  point  of  attack.  The  resurrection  of  Christ 
consisted  in  the  reunion  of  the  soul  with  his  body,  and  their  coming 
forth  from  the  tomb  together.  This  risen  body  of  the  Saviour  is 
called  "(?  glorious  body  I'  "a  heavenly  body,"  "a  spiritual  body,'' 
(Phil.  iii.  21  ;  ivpaviov,  I  Cor.  xv.  48;  Luke  xxiv.  31-37).  It  has 
been  disputed,  whether  the  risen  body  of  Christ  was  fully  glorified 
before  his  ascension  or  not.  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Theodoret  and 
others,  believed  the  former,  whilst  Jerome  and  the  Western  theolo- 
gians held  the  latter  opinion.  The  importance  of  this  doctrine  is 
fundamental,  i  Cor.  xv.  17;  col.  Rom.  x.  9.  To  have  been  an  eye- 
witness of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  was  an  essential  qualification 

*Art.  IX.,  p.  551.  flnstitut.  Relig.  Christ.,  p.  414. 


TERSON    AND    WORK    OF    CHRLST.  IO5 

of  an  apostle,  Acts  i.  21,  22;  Luke  xxiv.  47,  48.  The  Saviour  had 
predicted  his  ozun  resurrection,  and  tells  us  he  had  power  to  lay 
down  his  life,  and  power  to  take  it  up  again,  John  x.  18.  This 
wonderful  event  was  therefore  effected  by  the  divine  power  of  the 
TJieanthropos,  and  was  an  important  step  toward  his  completion  of 
the  work  for  which  he  appeared  on  earth,  as  well  as  a  distinct  ad- 
vance in  his  progress  to  the  throne  of  celestial  glory. 

Ascension  of  Christ. 

After  spending  forty  days  on  earth,  appearing  among  his  disciples 
on  such  a  variety  of  occasions,  and  under  such  various  circumstances, 
as  to  leave  no  earthly  doubt  of  his  resurrection,  and  to  afford  him 
opportunity  of  imparting  to  his  followers  all  necessary  additional 
instructions;  he  ascended  from  Bethany,  on  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  as  he  lifted  up  his  hands  and  blessed  them,  he  was  elevated 
from  the  view  of  the  multitude,  "a  cloud  received  him  out  of  their 
sight,"  and  "  he  was  carried  up  into  heaven,"  Luke  xxiv.  50,  51. 
The  terms  "  up"  and  "down"  being  only  relative  terms,  meaning 
toward  or  from  the  earth,  or  centre  of  attraction,  we  cannot  regard 
them  as  determining  the  locality  of  heaven.  Dr.  Reinhard  defines 
the  ascension  of  the  Saviour  to  be  "that  change  by  which  Christ 
departed  from  this  earth,  to  that  august  place  which  the  Scriptures 
denominate  heaven."  It  is  the  transition  of  the  Saviour  from  earth 
to  the  blessed  abode  of  God,  of  the  holy  angels,  and  the  spirits  of 
the  just  made  perfect.  Whether  this  celestial  state,  or  paradise,  is 
a  peculiar  place  or  state,  or  whether  it  extends  throughout  all 
worlds,  and  is  also  around  about  us,  is  a  question  our  present  limited 
faculties  cannot  positively  decide.  Pfaffius  believed  heaven  to  be 
in  the  bosom  of  God  himself,  where  angels  and  the  spirits  of  the 
just  made  perfect  will  enjoy  eternal  rest:  whilst  J.  D.  Michaelis 
supposed  the  renovated  earth  to  be  the  destined  future  abode 
of  the  blessed. 

In  heaven  the  body  of  Christ  will  certainly  be  fully  glorified,  will 
be  like  the  glorified  bodies  of  all  saints,  Phil.  iii.  21  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  42- 
53,  and  be,  at  least  in  some  measure,  unlike  the  one  he  had  on 
earth  after  his  resurrection,  when  he  ate  and  drank  material  and 
corruptible  food.  In  heaven  the  Theanthropos  will  be  encircled 
with  the  glory  which  the  Son  of  God  had  with  the  P'ather  ere  the 
world  was,  will  exercise  all  authority  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  and 


I06  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

govern  the  universe  for  the  benefit  of  his  Mediatorial  Kingdom  and 
the  glory  of  God.  This  is  also  involved  in  the  inspired  statement, 
that  ''He  is  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  tlie  Father,  that  he  might  per- 
petually reign  over  all,  and  sanctify  those  who  believe  in  him,  by 
sending  into  their  hearts  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  governs,  consoles, 
quickens  and  defends  them  against  the  devil  and  the  power  of  sin. 
And  that  the  same  Christ  will  return  again,  that  he  may  judge  the 
living  and  the  dead,  according  to  the  Apostles'  Creed." 

Return  to  Judgment. 

This  the  Scriptures  represent,  in  language  apparently  literal,  as 
occurring  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  accompanied  by  the  celestial 
hosts  and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Whilst  the  great  body  of 
orthodox  divines  (Gerhard,  Hollazius,  Baumgarten,  Buddeus,  &c.) 
adopt  a  literal  interpretation  of  the  leading  facts  of  this  description, 
all  admit  a  figurative  explanation  of  some  of  the  circumstances 
(such  as  opening  the  books,  &c.)  of  this  most  solemn  winding-up  of 
the  moral  administration  of  God  on  the  theatre  of  our  earth.  Acts 
xvii.  31;  X.  42;  Matt.  xxv.  26-29;  Jol"!!"^  v.  26-29;  2  Cor.  v.  10; 
Phil.  iii.  20. 

Some  divines  suppose  this  solemn  transaction  will  take  place  in 
the  atmosphere  (i  Thess.  iv.  17),  around  or  above  us,  as  the  earth 
would  be  too  limited  for  a  scene  in  which  all  the  members  of  all 
pfenerations  that  ever  lived  on  earth  are  to  be  embraced.  The  term 
"day"  {i}fjepa)  of  judgment  is  generally  regarded  as  an  indefinite 
period  (Gerhard  IX.,  56;  Michaelis  604),  although  if  the  limitations 
of  time  and  space  are  removed  from  the  soul  in  the  future  world, 
transactions  now  requiring  years  might  occur  in  an  hour.  Persons 
who  had  been  drowned  and  were  resuscitated  have  asserted  that  in 
the  act  of  drowning,  that  is,  just  before  their  consciousness  ceased, 
the  history  of  their  whole  lives,  with  numberless  incidents,  passed 
with  inconceivable  rapidity  in  review  before  them  as  in  a  single 
instant.  The  resurrection  bodies,  both  of  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  may,  moreover,  be  transparent  expressions  of  the  thoughts 
and  characters  of  the  parties,  and  in  them  each  one  can  read  his  or 
her  destiny  before  the  sentence  is  officially  pronounced  by  the 
Judge;  and  this  will  be  a  publication  sufficient  of  the  deeds  done  in 
the  body  by  all  who  are  to  receive  their  eternal,  irrevocable  sentence 
on  that  most  solemn,  never  to  be  forgotten  day  of  judgment. 


ARTICLE  IV. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH 

By  m.  valentine,  d.  d.,  ll.d. 


"  They  in  like  manner  teach  that  men  cannot  be  justified  before  God  by  their 
own  strength,  merits,  or  works  ;  but  that  they  are  justified  gratuitously  for 
Christ's  sake,  through  faith ;  when  they  believe  that  they  are  received  into 
favor,  and  that  their  sins  are  remitted  for  the  sake  of  Christ,  who  made  satis- 
faction for  our  transgressions  by  his  death.  This  faith  God  imputes  for  right- 
eousness before  him."     (Rom.  iii.  and  iv.) 

THE  Fourth  Article  of  the  Confession,  now  before  us  for  discus- 
sion, brings  us  into  the  very  heart  of  the  great  work  of  the 
Reformation.  More  than  any  other,  it  is  the  memorial  Article  of 
that  sublime  movement.  It  was  for  the  Evangelical  doctrine  of  Jus- 
tification by  Faith,  as  apprehended  in  the  depths  of  Luther's  ex- 
perience, that  the  struggle  was  begun.  When  the  conflict  was 
ended,  and  the  pure  Gospel  restored,  this  Article  in  the  Confession 
of  the  regenerated  and  living  Church,  stood  as  the  firm  monumental 
column  of  the  victory.  It  presents  the  central  doctrine,  about  which 
the  other  Articles  took  shape  in  clear  harmony  with  each  other,  and 
m  the  living  unity  of  the  Gospel  system.  Not  only  for  this  truth, 
but  in  a  peculiar  manner  by  it,  was  the  great  work  wrought.  Set 
forth  in  its  purity  and  power,  it  became  the  open  channel  through 
which  the  life-currents  of  Christ's  grace  came  again  into  a  reviving 
Church.  No  truth  from  the  armory  of  the  divine  word  became  so 
distinctively  "  the  sword  of  the  Spirit"  in  the  conflict.  D'Aubigne's 
statement  is  apt  and  beautiful :  "The  powerful  text,  '  The  just  shall 
live  by  faith'  was  a  creative  word  for  the  Reformer  and  the  Refor- 
mation." We  cannot  overestimate  the  historical  and  theological 
importance  of  the  Article  before  us.       Had  our    noble    Confessors 

107 


loS  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

been  asked  to  name  the  special  doctrine  for  whose  recovery  and 
restoration  into  the  midst  of  the  Christian  system  they  were  striving 
even  unto  blood,  they  would  have  pointed  to  this.  Indeed,  Melanch- 
thon  did,  in  the  very  conflict  at  Augsburg,  thus  single  out  and 
exalt  this  as  "  the  principal  and  most  important  Article  of  the  whole 
Christian  doctrine."  *  Luther  put  it  on  the  banner  of  the  Reforma- 
tion as  the  doctrine  with  which  the  Church  must  stand  or  fall. 
History  has  fully  recognized  this  importance  by  not  only  character- 
izing it  as  the  "  material  principle  of  the  Reformation,"  but  as  the 
distinguishing  fundamental  doctrine  of  Protestantism. 

Like  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  in  close  relation  to  which  the 
truth  of  this  Article  stands,  the  doctrine  of  justification  is  one  of 
pure  revelation,  and  in  its  examination  our  appeal  must  necessarily 
be  to  the  word  of  God.  The  suggestions  of  reason,  and  the  dog- 
mas of  ecclesiastical  authority,  must  all  be  held  subject  to  its  divine 
decisions.  Thus  we  retain  as  inseparably  joined  with  this  "material 
principle  of  the  Reformation,"  the  sole  authority  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, recognized  with  equal  historic  clearness  as  its  grand  "  formal 
principle." 

The  general  analysis  of  the  Article  is  easy.  It  has  been  so  framed 
as  to  present  the  whole  doctrine  of  justification  under  its  negative 
and  positive  aspects,  the  former  as  renouncing  the  errors  which  had 
obtained  destructive  sway  in  the  Romish  Church,  and  the  latter  as 
declaring  the  true  doctrine  of  the  blessed  Gospel.  We  shall  prob- 
ably best  accomplish  our  object,  to  set  forth  at  once  the  teachings 
of  our  Church  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  on  this  sub- 
ject, by  treating  it  under  these  two  aspects,  and  noting  the  historical 
and  theological  relations  thus  involved.  The  specific  points  in  the 
confessional  statement  will  thus  be  indicated,  and  covered  in  the 
discussion. 

I.  The  Impossibility  of  Self-Justification. 

The  language  of  the  Article  is  clear  and  emphatic :  Our  CJiurches 
teach  that  lue  cannot  obtain  forgiveneneiS  of  sin  and  be  justified  be- 
fore God  by  our  oivn  strength,  merits,  or  zvorks!'  This,  as  the  exhi- 
bition of  the  subject  on  its  negative  side,  sets  forth  a  truth  that  is 
fundamental  in  Christian  doctrine.     The  Confessors  could  not  have 

*Apol.,  Art.  IV.  (II.) 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  IO9 

maintained  the  integrity  of  the  Gospel  system  of  grace  without  this 
denial  of  a  self-wrought  righteousness. 

I.  The  pressing  necessity  for  it  at  the  time  was  to  witness  against 
the  false  teaching  of  Rome.  Her  corruption  of  the  doctrine  of 
justification  had  been  the  point  of  the  introduction  of  almost  all  the 
deadly  errors  that  were  holding  sway  over  souls.  Perversion  of  the 
truth  here  became  an  inevitable  perversion  of  many  of  the  most 
vital  and  practical  forces  of  Christianity.  It  was,  like  an  obscura- 
tion of  the  sun,  the  shrouding  of  everything  in  darkness.  The 
heavy  shadows  of  mediaeval  history,  and  the  deep  paralysis  of  the 
whole  Church,  bear  painful  testimony  to  the  widespread  conse- 
quences. The  words  of  Luther  on  Gen.  xxi.  were  verified  in  the 
sad  experience :  "  This  is  the  chief  article  of  faith,  and  if  it  is  taken 
away  or  corrupted,  the  Church  cannot  stand,  nor  can  God  retain  his 
glory,  which  is  that  he  may  exercise  mercy,  and  for  the  sake  of  his 
Son  forgive  and  save."  The  manifold  cry  that  was  going  up  to 
heaven  for  a  reformation  of  the  Church  arose  from  the  hiding  of 
the  way  of  salvation  in  a  perversion  of  this  prime  and  vital  doctrine. 
No  correction  of  external  abuses  alone  could  heal  her  hurt  and 
restore  her  health  and  power.  The  remedial  process  must  touch 
the  deep  point  whence  all  the  disorders  went  forth.  The  error  had 
hidden  "the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life,"  from  the  view  of  per- 
ishing men.     The  false  teaching  of  Rome  was  twofold: 

First,  Instead  of  exhibiting  justification  in  its  true  nature  as  an 
external  forensic  act  of  God,  she  represented  it  as  subjective  and 
internal.  The  error  was  one  of  long  growth.  Its  rise  may  be 
traced  back  through  a  development  of  centuries.  The  germ  of  it 
was  involved  in  the  statement  of  Augustine :  ''  Jiistificat  impinui 
Dciis,  non  solum  dimittendo,  q^ice  mala  facit,  scd  etiam  do».a>ido  carl- 
tatcm,  qnce  dcclinat  a  malo  ct  facit  bonum  per  Spiritum  Sanctum.'"^ 
The  name  and  authority  of  Augustine,  like  a  royal  stamp  on  coin, 
gave  currency  to  this  representation.  From  this  day  the  idea  was 
developed,  confounding  justification  with  sanctification,  and  making 
it,  not  an  objective  divine  act,  but  somthing  subjective  and  transitive, 
constituting  men  internally  and  essentially  righteous.  It  was  re- 
garded as  a  making  righteous  by  the  communication  of  the  Divine 
life  in  fellowship  with  Christ.     Perhaps,  in  its  earlier  announcement, 

*  Opus  Cont.  Jul.  II.,  Ch.  168. 


no  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

this  view  was   meant  to  guard   against  the  tendency  to   rely  on   a 
merely  nominal  faith,  and  to  hold  saving  faith  in  its  undivorced  con- 
nection with   the   new  life   of  grace.     Without  a   divine  vitality  in 
union  with  faith,  Christianity  would  lose  its  transforming  and  up- 
lifting power.     But,  unfortunately,  instead  of  showing  the  necessary 
relation   of  regeneration   and   sanctification    to   the    faith   in   which 
God's  justification  of  the  sinner  is  conditioned,  it  introduced  a  con- 
fusion of  thought  and  expression,  in  which  the  objective  Divine  act 
and  the  subjective  attending  change  were  confounded  and  identified. 
Most  of  the  prominent  Schoolmen  made  justification  consist  in  the 
subjective  character  of  the  believer,  as  constituted  intrinsically  holy 
in  the  effectual  operation  of  faith.     The  product  of  grace  in  the  soul 
was  made  its  basis  and  condition.     By  Thomas  Aquinas  it  was  rep- 
resented as  involving  an  infusion  of  the  Divine  life,  infiisio  gratia. 
"  Jiistificatio  prhno  ac  proprie  dicitur  facdo  jitstitice,  secundario  vera  et 
quasi  iinpropric  potest  did  jiistificatio  significatio  Jiistitics,  vel  dispo- 
sitio  ad  justitiaui.     Scd  si  loquanuir  dc  jiistijicatione  proprie  dicta, 
justitia  potest  accipi  pro2it  est  in  habitu,  vel  proiit  est  in  actii.     Et 
sccnndum  hoc  justijicatio  diiplicitcr  dicitiir,  nno  guide  in  inodo,  secun- 
duvi  quod  homo  Jit  Justus  adipiscens  habituni  JustiticB,  alio  vero  inodo, 
secundum  quod  opera  Justities  operatur,  ut  secundum  hoc  Jiistijicatio 
nihil  aliud  sit  quam  Justities  executio.    Justitia  autem,  sicui  et  alicE 
virtutes,  potest  accipi  et  acquisita,  et  injusa.     *     *     Acquisita  quidem 
causatur  ex  operibus,  sed  injusa  *causatur  ab  ipso  Deo  per  ejus  gra- 
tiam!"^     This  injusio  gratice  was  necessary  to  the  forgiveness  of  sin 
by  God.     Though  some,  by  deeper  experiences  of  grace,  clearer  re- 
cognition of  the  witness  of  their  Christian  consciousness,  and  better 
insight  into  Scripture  teaching,  were  led  to  more  objective  views, 
their  truer  sentiments  were  so  feebly  sustained  as  to  make  no  im- 
pression on  the  settled  opinion.    So  that  the  decision  of  the  Council 
of  Trent  may  be  regarded  as  setting  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  times 
on   this   point:  "Justification    is  not   remission  of  sins  merely,  but 
also  sanctification  and  the  renewal  of  the  inner  man  by  the  volun- 
tary reception  of  grace  and  divine  gifts,  so  that  he  who  was  unright- 
eous  is  made  righteous,  and   the  enemy  becomes  a  friend   and   an 
heir  according   to   the   hope  of  eternal  life."t     According   to   this 

*  Summ.  P.  II„  I.     Quoted  by  Hagenbach. 

t  "  Jusiificatio  7to7i  est  sola  peccatoruDi  remissio,  sed  et  sanctificaiio  et  reno- 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  I  1 

justification  becomes  the  renewal  and  transformation  of  the  be- 
liever's nature.  It  is  a  transitive  process,  making  him  really  and 
internally  righteous.  The  vigorous  vindication  of  this  doctrine  by 
Bellarmin,  De  Justif ,  demonstrates  the  strength  with  which  the 
error  had  laid  hold  of  the  mind  of  the  age. 

This  view  involves,  as  necessary  sequence,  the  existence  of  de- 
grees of  justification,  according  to  the  extent  of  the  Divine  opera- 
tion within  the  believer.  Made  to  consist  in  a  subjective  holiness, 
of  varied  development  but  alwaj's  imperfect,  no  certain  assurance  of 
forgiveness  and  acceptance  with  God  could  be  enjoyed.  For  the 
evidence  of  his  justification,  the  Christian  had  to  look  within  him- 
self, and  measure  it  in  the  degree  in  which  he  had  been  made  really 
righteous.  He  had  to  base  his  assurance  of  hope,  not  on  the  objec- 
tive perfect  righteousness  and  work  of  Christ,  but  on  a  righteous- 
ness wrought  in  partial  measure  by  the  Divine  operation  in  his 
heart.  What  might  be  the  minimum  of  infused  righteousness  nec- 
essary for  justification  could  not  be  known.  No  one  could  settle 
the  point  of  a  sure  grade  of  self-worthiness  for  acceptance  before 
an  infinitely  holy  God.  Hence  it  was  taught  that  no  one'could,  with- 
out a  particular  revelation,  be  assured  of  his  salvation.  No  wonder 
that  Luther  could  find  no  peace  for  his  stricken  soul,  till  a  truer 
view  of  justification  shed  the  Divine  light  on  his  mind.  No  won- 
der that  the  Reformers  so  emphatically  declare  that  the  doctrine  of 
Rome  could  give  no  relief  and  comfort  to  the  sin-burdened  con- 
science.* As  long  as  men  are  directed  to  look  onl\'  on  the  right- 
eousness that  is  personal  and  inherent  in  them,  at  the  very  best 
defective,  and  coupled  with  vile  and  condemning  sin,  it  is  impossible 
to  find  a  reliable  consolation  and  rest.  The  unhappy  error  stands 
in  the  boldest  and  most  self-rebuking  contrast  with  the  declaration 
of  St.  Paul,  "  Being  justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God 
through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."     Rom.  v.  i. 

The  second  element  in  the  false  teaching  of  Rome  was  the  in- 
clusion of  good  works  in  the  ground  of  justification.  Those  were 
represented  and  looked  upon  as  meritorious,  and,  at  least  in  part, 
influential  in  securing  the   sinner's  acceptance.     It  is  but  just,  how- 

vatio  interioris  hominis  per  voluntariutH  susceptionem  gratia  et  donorum, 
unde  homo  ex  i7ijnsto  fit  Justus  ex  ^nimico  amicus,  ut  sit  lucres  secundum  spcm 
vitcE  aterftcc."     Cone.  Trid.,  Sess.  6,  Cap.  7. 
*Apol.,  Art.  IV.  (II.) 


I  1  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ever,  to  say  that  Rome  did  not  mean  to  be  understood  as  wholly  and 
absolutely  excluding  the  work  of  Christ  from  the  foundation  of 
the  sinner's  justification.  In  a  certain  sense  there  was  a  recogni- 
tion of  indebtedness  to  his  redeeming  grace  for  it.  But  the  concep- 
tion of  Christ's  relation  to  it  was  so  confused  and  overloaded  with 
qualifying  explanations  as  to  present,  practically  and  really,  a  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  human  works  and  merit.  A  certain  ability 
to  perform  acceptable  works  without  grace  was  claimed  for  man. 
And  though  grace  was  regarded  as  influential  in  engrafting  the  sin- 
ner's nature  into  the  sources  of  the  divine  life,  both  in  the  earlier 
and  later  stages  of  the  work  there  was  an  inclusion  of  the  idea  of 
worthiness  and  merit.  The  very  products  of  grace,  in  the  pro- 
gressive justification  which  was  based  on  intrinsic  and  growing 
holiness,  were  viewed  as  deserving  and  justly  securing  the  favor  of 
God.  The  human  good  work  was  represented  as  acting  in  conjimc- 
tion  with  the  merit  of  Christ,  in  attaining  justification  before  God. 
Melanchthon's  declaration  in  the  Apology  expresses  the  result : 
"When  the  scholastics  attempt  to  define  how  man  is  justified  before 
God,  they  teach  only  the  righteousness  and  piety  of  a  correct  ex- 
ternal deportment  before  the  world,  and  of  good  works,  and  in 
addition  devise  the  dream  that  human  reason  is  able,  without  the 
aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  love  God  above  all  things."  "  In  this 
manner  our  adversaries  have  taught  that  men  merit  \\\^  remission  of 
sins.*  The  subtle  distinction  between  jncritum  de  coiignio  and  iner- 
itiini  dc  condigno,  originated  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  and  employed  by 
Romish  theologians  in  explanation  of  their  doctrine,  does  not  save 
its  character.  For  although  Christ  alone  was  represented  as  hav- 
ing originally  and  in  himself  a  incrititni  cojidigni,  yet  a  vicritiini  con- 
grid  was  claimed  as  attainable  by  the  sinner  prior  to  grace,  and 
then  the  vicritmn  condigni  was  connected  with  all  his  good  works. 
Before  his  conversion,  and  independently  of  the  primavi  gratiam  or 
habitiim,  of  which  they  sometimes  spoke  as  gained  for  him  by 
Christ,  he  could  perform  good  works  which  formed  this  merit  of 
congruity,  rendering  it  meet,  proper,  equitable,  and  necessary  for 
God  to  reward  with  grace.  The  Apology  presents  the  idea  clearly : 
"They  maintain  that  the  Lord  God  must  of  necessity  give  grace 
unto  those  who  do  such  good  works ;  not,  indeed,  that  he  is  com- 

*Apol.,  Art.  IV.  (II.) 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  II3 

pelled,  but  because  this  is  the  order,  which  God  will  not  transgress 
or  alter."  Through  this  kind  of  merit  he  was  supposed  to  attain 
the  liabitinn  or  quickened  disposition  and  inclination  to  love  God. 
Then  by  love,  patience,  zeal,  and  good  works,  he  attained  the  merit 
of  congruity,  which  could  claim  a  recompense  and  eternal  life  on 
the  score  of  desert  and  justice.  "  The  Papists,"  writes  Luther,  on 
Gal.  ii.  16,  "say,  that  a  good  work  before  grace  is  able  to  obtain 
grace  of  congruity  (which  they  call  mcritiiui  de  congrnd),  because  it 
is  meet  that  God  should  reward  such  a  work.  But  when  grace  is 
obtained,  the  work  following  deserveth  everlasting  life  of  due  debt 
and  worthiness,  which  they  call  mcritiim  de  condigno!'  Besides 
this,  it  must  be  remembered  that  they  taught  that  Christ  made  sat- 
isfaction in  his  obedience  and  death  only  for  original  sin,  leaving 
actual  sins  to  be  covered  by  the  believer's  penances  and  good  works; 
denying,  at  the  same  time,  that  the  Redeemer  by  His  work  and  suf- 
ferings has  secured  any  such  righteousness  as  may  be  imputed  to 
the  sinner  and  justify  him  in  the  sight  of  God.*  The  Gospel  of 
grace  was  thus  thoroughly  overthrown  in  a  more  than  semi-Pelagian 
scheme  of  justification  by  human  strength  and  good  works.  The 
merit  of  Christ  was  displaced  from  its  sacred  position  as  the  only 
and  sufficient  ground  of  the  sinner's  acceptance,  and  the  way  of 
grace  was  no  more  grace. 

The  following  admirable  summary  of  these  aspects  of  the  false 
teachings  of  Rome,  is  drawn  from  diivti3X.\sc/'  Dc  Jiistitia  Inhacrcntc, 
contra  Pontificios I'  hy  John  Peter  Konow,  Wittenberg,  1687.  "In 
the  first  place  the  Papists  teach  that  an  adult,  while  }-et  unrenewed 
can,  by  the  natural  powers  of  his  free  will,  with  the  aid  of  inciting 
and  assisting  grace,  perform  some  spiritually  good  works.  Not 
only  is  he  able,  but  if  he  desires  to  be  justified,  he  is  obliged  to  per- 
form acts  of  faith,  fear,  hope,  love,  penitence,  reception  of  the  pro- 
vided sacraments,  of  new  life  and  obedience  to  the  commands  of 
God.  Just  as  in  natural  changes,  certain  dispositions  must  precede, 
b\'  which  the  subject  is  prepared  to  receive  the  new  form,  so  in  jus- 
tification, man,  who  is  to  undergo  a  spiritual  change,  must  dispose 
and  prepare  himself  for  the  attainment  of  righteousness." 

They  represent  also  that,  through  faith,  which  comes  by  hearing, 
man  is   freely  moved  toward  God  by  believing  those  things  which 

*See  Gerhard,  Loci,  Vol.  VII.,  Cap.  II. 


114  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

have  been  revealed  and  promised  by  him,  especially  that  the  sinner 
is  justified  through  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  This 
faith  is  itself  the  beginning,  and,  as  it  were,  the  first  root  of  justifica- 
tion, which  in  a  manner  opens  the  way  for  fear,  hope,  love,  and 
other  equally  needful  dispositions  ;  this  alone  is  by  no  means  suf- 
ficient. *  *  *  They  teach  further  that  these  dispositions, 
among  which  faith  is  the  first  in  order,  are  not  merely  results 
wrought  in  a  passive  subject,  but  belong  to  his  active  agency;  not 
in  the  way  of  an  instrumental  cause,  apprehending  the  merits  of 
Christ,  but  as  a  meritorious  cause,  by  its  own  proper  act  obtaining 
and  deserving  justification;  not,  indeed,  dc  coudigno,  on  the  ground 
of  justice  and  intrinsic  goodness,  but  as  acceptable  to  God,  and 
fitting  and  honorable. 

Now,  after  man  has  prepared  himself  in  this  way,  they  say  that 
with  the  remission,  that  is,  as  they  explain,  the  expulsion  of  sin, 
God  infuses  into  him  a  principle  [habitus)  of  righteousness,  by  which 
he  is  formally  rendered  righteous  and  accepted  for  eternal  life. 
This  habitus  is  not  single  and  simple,  but  embraces  principles,  [habi- 
tus) of  faith,  hope,  charity,  and  repentance.  *  *  *  *  For  jus- 
tification is  distinguished  by  the  Papists  \nto  Jirst  ziwd  second.  They 
call  that  the  first  in  which  sinful  man  becomes  righteous,  through 
infused  principles  of  faith,  hope,  love,  patience,  &c.  They  make 
that  the  second  hy  whi*ch  the  righteous  man  is  made  more  righteous 
through  works  of  righteousness,  performed  from  the  infused  princi- 
ples or  inclinations,  maintaining,  nourishing,  increasing,  and  perfect- 
ing an  habitual  righteousness.  For  this  first  justification  they 
suppose  the  principle  of  faith,  joined  with  the  other  infused  princi- 
ples of  righteousness,  sufficient.  And  so  primarily  regenerate  in- 
fants are  justified  without  any  actual  faith  of  their  own.  Thus,  also, 
adults  who  do  not  continue  to  live  after  their  conversion.  With 
this  difference,  however,  that  infants  are  justified  through  the  prin- 
ciple of  faith,  hope,  and  love  alone,  without  any  previous  disposi- 
tion, but  adults  through  these  same  principles,  preceded  by  disposi- 
tions from  prevenient  grace.  Both  are  justified  without  the  works 
of  righteousness,  performed  from  the  infused  principle — adults  not 
without  preparatory  acts  which  are  also  numbered  among  good 
works.  In  the  second  justification,  of  adults  who  live  after  conver- 
sion and  the  remission  of  their  sins,  works  of  righteousness  pro- 
ceeding from  the  infused  principles  are  also  required;  and  these  are 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  I  5 

properly  meritorious,  deserving  not  only  an  increase  of  habitual 
righteousness,  but  also  life  and  eternal  salvation.  *  *  *  *  j^lH: 
to  state  the  whole  doctrine  in  a  few  words,  the  Papists  agree  in 
representing  the  justification  of  man  in  the  sight  of  God  as  three- 
fold. First,  inchoative,  in  inceptive  dispositions  in  which  a  formal 
righteousness  is  begun :  Secondly,  Formally,  through  an  infused  prin- 
ciple \JiabiUis\  of  righteousness :  Thirdly,  meritoriously,  through 
the  exercise  of  the  infused  principle,  or  the  works  which  follow  that 
principle.  All  this  righteousness  of  man  thus  justified  in  the  way 
of  inceptive  dispositions,  formally  and  meritoriousK-,  the\'  call  in- 
Jicrcut ;  whether  it  exist  as  a  quality  or  an  activity,  and  thus  sub- 
sisting in  the  man,  just  as  an  attribute  belongs  to  the  subject  in 
which  it  inheres.  On  account  of  this  diversity  they  also  distinguish 
inherent  righteousness  as  Habitual  and  Actual.  Habitual  righteous- 
ness they  treat  as  a  permanent  rectitude  in  the  way  of  habits  \Jiabi- 
tiis\  or  an  infused  principle  out  of  which  the  rectitude  of  all  the 
powers  proceed,  involving  such  spiritual  affections  in  the  believer, 
that,  whenever  he  will,  he  may  with  readiness,  ease,  and  deHght, 
perform  good  works.  To  the  Actual  righteousness  they  vq^cv,  first, 
the  person's  dispositions  of  faith,  fear,  hope,  and  other  acts  in  which 
they  desire  the  habitual  righteousness  to  be  begun.  Then  also, 
principally  and  specifically,  they  place  Actual  righteousness  in  the 
exercise  of  the  Habitual  righteousness,  and  declare  it  to  be  nothing 
else  than  the  endeavor  after  good  works  by  which  the  Christian 
maintains  his  justification,  and  by  truly  deserving  it,  secures  for  him- 
self both  an  increase  of  righteousness  and  eternal  life  and  salvation." 
Cap.  IV— X. 

From  this  sad  confounding  of  justification  with  sanctification  in  the 
doctrine  of  justification  by  an  inherent  righteousness,  and  the  con- 
sequent belief  in  the  meritoriousness  of  works,  the  way  was  open 
to  the  greatest  absurdities  and  abuses.  The  deep  poison  of  the 
error  flowed  out,  in  blighting  power,  through  all  the  currents  of  the 
Church's  life.  It  could  not  but  be  that  practical  piety,  cut  off  from 
its  sources  of  true  vitality,  should  be  perverted  into  multitudinous 
false  and  unseemly  manifestations.  The  merit  of  work  and  ascetic 
self-culture  became  the  very  soul  of  the  monastic  seclusions,  pil- 
grimages, penances,  and  the  circle  of  perverted  and  perverting  will- 
worship,  which  at  once  deformed  the  Christian  life  and  disgraced 
the  church  of  that  day.     From  the  doctrine  of  personal  justification 


I  I  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

by  works,  the  step  was  easy  to  the  conclusion  that  special  zeal  and 
devotion  might  do  more  than  enough  to  justify.  Here  was  the 
natural  entrance  of  the  doctrine  of  supererogatory  works.  These 
were  regarded  as  forming  a  treasury  of  accumulated  merit,  at  the 
disposal  of  the  Church.  Though  at  first  the  merits  of  Christ  were 
held  mainly  to  constitute  the  Church's  treasure,*  the  doctrine  was 
developed  so  as  to  refer  almost  exclusively  to  the  superabounding 
merits  of  the  saints, f  Out  of  this  false  doctrine  arose  the  mon- 
strous system  of  indulgences,  into  which  the  gross  darkness  of 
mediaeval  Christianity  culminated.  The  confounding  of  justifica- 
tion with  regeneration  and  sanctification,  and  looking  upon  it  as  in- 
herent, thus  proved  the  direful  source  of  nearly  all  the  Church's 
woes.  It  presented  in  vivid  reality  the  truth  of  Luther's  words, 
"  Jacciitc  articiilo  jitstificationis  omnia  jaccnt!'  Against  an  error  so 
dishonoring  to  Christ  and  fruitful  of  evils,  the  Confessors  felt  called 
upon  to  bear  emphatic  and  solemn  testimony.  Fidelity  to  the  Re- 
deemer, to  His  truth,  and  to  imperiled  and  perishing  souls,  could 
not  otherwise  be  maintained. 

2.  In  this  witnessing  against  Rome,  they  were  taking  a  position 
sustained  and  demanded  by  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Their  renuncia- 
tion of  the  Papal  error  was  simply  a  clear  statement  of  the  emphatic 
teaching  of  the  word  of  God.  Recurrence  to  a  few  passages  will 
suffice  to  show  the  harmony  of  the  Confession  with  the  Scriptures, 
and  the  solemn  urgency  with  which  they  guard  against  the  idea  of 
justification  by  our  "own  merit,  strength  or  works." 

"The  man  that  doeth  tliem  shall  live  by  them,"  Gal.  iii.  12,  is 
given  as  the  rule  of  the  "  law  of  commandments."  Perfect  obedi- 
ence is  made  the  legal  condition  of  acceptance  before  God.  That 
this  is  impossible  with  man,  is  asserted  in  the  harmonious  voice  of 
all  the  Scriptures.  St.  Paul,  Rom.  iii.  9,  10,  declares,  "  We  have 
proved  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  under  sin.  *  *  *  There  is  none 
righteous,  no,  not  one."  "  Now  we  know  that  what  things  soever 
the  law  saith,  it  saith  to  them  who  are  under  the  law ;  that  every 

*  Alexander  Halesius,  Summa,  P.  IV.,  Art.  2.  IndulgenticC  et  relaxationes 
fiunt  de  meritis  supeieiogationis  membrorum  Christ!,  et  maxinie  de  supereroga- 
tionibus  meritorum  Christi,  quas  sunt  spiritualis  thesaurus  Ecclesiae. 

t  Albertus  Magnus,  Sent.,  Lib.  IV.,  Dist.  20,  Art.  16.  Indulgentia  sive  relax- 
atio  est  remissio  poenfe  injunctas  ex  vi  clavium  et  thesauro  supererogationis 
perfectorum  procedens. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  I  7 

mouth  may  be  stopped,  and  all  the  world  may  become  guilty  before 
God."  "For  all  have  sinned  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God," 
vs.  19,  23.  From  tliis  condition  of  sin  and  condemnation,  in  which 
every  man  is  by  nature,  there  is  declared  to  be  no  escape  by  his  own 
strength,  obedience,  or  works.  "  The  law  worketh  wrath,"  Rom.  iv. 
15.  "Therefore  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified 
in  his  sight,"  Rom.  iii.  20.  "That  no  man  is  justified  by  the  law  in 
the  sight  of  God,  is  evident:  for  the  just  shall  live  by  faith,"  Gal.  iii. 
II.  "If  there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  have  given  life, 
verily  righteousness  had  been  by  the  law.  But  the  Scripture  hath 
concluded  all  under  sin,"  Gal.  iii.  21,  22.  All  that  the  law  can  do 
with  sinners  is  to  condemn,  and  occasion  the  knowledge  of  sin.  In 
the  way  of  bringing  men  to  salvation,  this  is  declared  to  be  its  dis- 
tinct and  only  office.  No  guilty  soul  can  struggle  back  into  the 
favor  of  God,  by  observance  of  its  requisitions.  It  is  "a  school- 
master" (-aiAayuyor,  not  an  instructor,  but  a  servant  whose  office  it 
was  to  conduct  children  to  and  from  the  public  schools,)  to  lead  to 
Clirist,  as  the  only  provided  righteousness.  In  these  and  many 
other  passages,  reiterating  this  truth  in  multiplied  forms  and  with 
earnest  emphasis,  the  Reformers  saw  an  absolute  exclusion  of  the 
hope  of  salvation  by  human  strength,  or  works.  The  sinner  is  left 
helpless  and  hopeless  in  himself  "  For  as  many  as  are  of  the  works 
of  the  law  are  under  the  curse,"  Gal.  iii.  10. 

Not  only  in  the  general  denial  of  justification  by  works,  but  in  the 
particular  repudiation  of  the  idea  of  merit,  were  the  Reformers  but 
re-asserting  a  fundamental  truth  of  God's  word.  The  whole  notion 
of  merit,  in  which  the  false  theory  of  justification  had  been  based  by 
Rome,  is  opposed  by  the  clear  teaching  of  Scripture.  The  principle 
is  laid  down  by  our  .Saviour,  "When  ye  have  done  all  these  things 
which  are  commanded  you,  say,  We  are  unprofitable  servants  :  we 
have  done  that  which  was  our  duty  to  do,"  Luke  xvii.  10.  The 
best  fulfilment  of  the  law,  and  the  purest  attainments  of  holiness,  do 
not  go  beyond  duty,  and  are  not  regarded  by  God  as  earning  any 
claim  before  him.  Hence  the  unequivocal  statement  which  totally 
excludes  the  notion  of  merit,  "  Ye  are  saved  by  grace — not  of 
works,  lest  any  man  should  boast,"  Eph.  ii.  8,  9.  "  And  if  b\'  grace, 
then  it  is  no  more  of  works :  otherwise,  grace  is  no  more  grace. 
But  if  it  be  of  works,  then  is  it  no  more  grace:  otherwise,  work  is 
no  more  work,"  Rom.  xi.  6.  Even  the  smallest  share  of  merit  is 
9 


Il8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

thus  excluded  from  the  observance  of  the  law  and  the  services  of 
piety.  Neither  as  supplementary  to  the  work  of  Christ,  nor  in  any 
combination  with  it,  do  the  Scriptures  tolerate  a  notion  of  human 
merit,  in  the  foundation  of  the  sinner's  justification. 

3.  This  teaching  of  the  Divine  word  is  fully  sustained  by  the  de- 
cisions of  enlightened  reason.  In  this,  the  truth  is  fortified  with 
additional  strength.  It  is  true,  that  reason  is  not  to  sit  as  a  judge 
of  the  doctrines  of  revelation.  Its  concurring  conclusions,  however, 
aid  in  fixing  our  conviction  of  these  doctrines.  The  truths  of  the 
word  stand  out  in  clearer  demonstration  and  power,  when  they  at 
once  make  answer  for  themselves  to  every  man's  intellect  and  con- 
science. This  truth  is  of  this  kind.  Our  Confessors,  in  throwing  it 
into  the  bold  foreground  of  their  view  of  justification,  were  taking 
a  position  in  which  they  could  hear  every  voice  from  Scripture  an- 
swered by  consenting  and  confirmatory  voices  from  the  conscience 
and  reason  of  mankind.  The  painful  helplessness  of  our  guilty 
race  has  ever  been  crying  out,  "  Wherewith  shall  a  man  come  be- 
fore God,  or  bow  himself  before  the  Almighty  ?"  Reason  adjudges 
that  an  unfallen  and  sinless  being  may  be  accepted  before  God,  on 
the  principle,  "  He  that  doeth  them  shall  live  by  them."  An  un- 
broken and  perfect  obedience  by  a  holy  being  leaves  no  place  for 
condemnation.  But  he  that  offends  in  a  single  point  becomes  a 
transgressor.  And  "there  is  no  man  that  liveth  and  sinneth  not." 
We  must  thus  view  our  race,  as  it  really  is,  under  condemnation  for 
original  and  actual  sin.  The  question  as  it  must  come  up  before 
our  reason,  concerns  the  justification  of  sinners,  and  the  conclusion 
flows  in  rigid  logical  sequence  from  the  premises.  Sin,  in  its  very 
nature,  is  a  withholding  from  God  what  is  his  due.  It  involves 
opposition  of  the  creature's  will  to  him,  and  refusal  of  the  obedi- 
ence and  service  which  belong  to  him.  This  withholding  what  is 
due  to  God  becomes  both  a  crime  and  a  debt.  Thus,  not  only  the 
obedience  withheld,  but  satisfaction  for  the  crime,  must  be  required 
of  the  sinner.  He  has  not  only  fallen  into  fatal  arrears,  but  come 
under  the  penalty  of  a  law  and  government  on  whose  sacred  invio- 
lability the  peace  and  order  of  a  moral  universe  are  hung.  "  The 
soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  as  the  eternal  law  of  God's  holiness 
and  love,  announces  the  destruction  into  which  the  transgressor  has 
brought  himself.  With  his  fallen  nature,  he  is  now  able  neither  to 
keep  the  law  nor  to  render   satisfaction   for  its  past  violation.     He 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  II9 

cannot  pay  the  debt.  In  his  criminal  inabihty,  every  effort  to  obey 
is  defective  and  vitiated  by  sin.  Could  he  even  start  anew,  and 
render  thenceforth  a  perfect  obedience,  the  past  would  remain  with- 
out satisfaction.  All  a  man's  powers,  his  time,  his  talents,  his  skill 
and  service,  belong  to  God.  There  is  not  a  moment  in  which  he 
can  feel  released  from  the  claims  of  God  upon  him,  not  a  power  of 
body,  a  faculty  of  mind,  an  endowment  of  energy,  which  is  beyond 
the  obligation  of  entire  consecration  to  him.  And  were  he.  as  a 
creature,  enabled  thenceforth  to  give  to  God  a  perfect  service,  he 
would  only  be  doing  his  present  duty,  and  could  have  no  surplus  of 
time  or  powers  to  atone  for  the  past  and  pay  the  dreadful  debt. 
Thus,  on  both  points,  man  must  come  fatally  short.  His  works  can 
no  longer  justify  him.  This  part  of  our  Article  is,  therefore,  sus- 
tained by  the  clearest  deductions  of  reason,  as  well  as  by  the  em- 
phatic teachings  of  the  word  of  God. 

The  deep  and  deadly  error  of  Rome  has  thus  been  renounced. 
Faithful  and  true  witness  is  borne  against  it.  That  doctrine  main- 
taining the  meritoriousness  of  good  works,  and  teaching  men  to  rely 
upon  them  for  justification  before  God,  was  falsifying  the  Gospel, 
and  laying  another  foundation  than  that  which  is  laid  in  Jesus 
Christ.  "  Thus  these  men  conceal  Christ  from  us,"  exclaims  Me- 
lanchthon,  "  and  bury  him  anew,  so  that  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
recognize  him  as  a  mediator.'"^'  It  was  the  all-perverting  error,  in 
which  centered  the  crying  necessity  of  the  Reformation. 

II.  The  True  Doctrine  of  Justification. 

A  more  concise,  comprehensive,  and  vigorous  statement  of  the 
positive  side  of  this  great  doctrine  could  scarcely  be  framed:  "We 
obtain  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  are  justified  before  God  by  grace,  for 
Christ's  sake,  through  faith,  if  we  believe  that  Christ  suffered  for 
us,  and  that  our  sins  are  remitted  unto  us  for  Christ's  sake,  who 
made  satisfaction  for  our  transgressions  by  his  death.  This  faitii 
God  imputes  for  righteousness  before  him,  Rom,  iii.  and  iv." 
This  presents  all  the  principal  truths  in  the  teaching  of  the  Gospel 
on  the  subject.  It  calls  our  attention  to  the  four  great  and  all- 
inclusive  points:  i.  The  Source  of  yitstification,  "Grace,"  [aits 
gnaden gratis];  2.   The  Ground  of  it,  "  For  Christ's  sake,"  "  Christ 

*Apol.,  Art.  IV. 


I  20  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

suffered  for  us " — "made  satisfaction  for  our  transgressions  by  his 
death;"  3.  The  Nature  of  it,  "  We  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins,  right- 
eousness and  eternal  life;"  4.  T/ic  Instr7inicnt,  "Through  Faith." 
An  intelligent  vnew  of  the  teaching  of  our  Confession  will  be  ob- 
tained by  looking  at  these  points  in  their  order. 

I.   TJic  Source. 

This  is  the  grace  of  God,  which,  in  the  technical  language  of 
Theo]og}\  is  denominated  the  efficient  cause,  causa  efficieiis,  of 
justification.  "  God  forgives  us  our  sins  out  of  pure  grace."*  "Jus- 
tified freely  b}'  his  grace,"  says  St.  Paul,  Rom.  iii.  24.  "  God  so 
loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life," 
John  iii.  16.  It  is  needless  to  repeat  the  numerous  texts  which 
trace  up  our  salvation  to  its  source  in  the  compassionate  love  and 
grace  of  God.  They  are  varied  and  multiplied  in  rich  profusion 
throughout  the  New  Testament.  Even  faith,  though  most  vitally 
involved  in  our  justification,  is  in  no  sense  its  source  or  efficient 
cause.  "  It  is  God  that  justifieth,"  Rom.  viii.  33,  His  own  love  hav- 
ing made  the  provision  by  which  he  can  be  just  and  yet  thus  justify 
the  ungodly,  Rom.  iii.  25  ;  iv.  5.  The  sense  of  the  term  grace, 
A'«/^'",  as  used  in  this  connection,  must  be  clearly  distinguished. 
It  expresses  neither  any  divine  act  done  for  us,  nor  any  quality  or 
excellence  wrought  in  us,  but  the  mercy  and  benevolence  of  God 
toward  us.f  And  this  grace  from  which  justification  and  salvation 
freely  flow,  must  be  referred  to  the  one  God,  revealed  as  the 
Trinity  in  unity.  "  I,  even  I,  am  the  Lord  ;  and  besides  me  there  is 
no  sa\-iour,"  Is.  xliii.  11.  Whilst  maintaining  the  order  and  dis- 
tinction of  the  Persons  in  the  Trinity,  the  Scriptures  clearly  refer 
to  the  whole  Godhead,  in  pointing  us  to  the  primal  source  of  the 
sinner's  forgiveness  and  salvation.  Hence  our  justification  is  in- 
terchangeably ascribed  to  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit.     John  iii.  16 ;  Gal.  ii.  20  ;  Rom.  v.  5  ;  Col.  iii,  13 ;  Is.  liii.  1 1  • 

*  Form  of  Concord,  Art.  III. 

f  Melanchthon,  Loci  Theo.  De  Gratia :  Facessant  Anstotellica  figmenta  de 
qualitatibus.  Non  aliud  enim  est  gratia  si  exactissime  describenda  sit,  nisi  Dei 
benevolentia  erga  nos,  seu  voluntas  Dei  miserta  nostri.  Non  significat  ergo 
gratiae  vocabulum  ciualitatem  aliquam  in  nobis ;  sed  potius  ipsam  Dei  volun- 
tatem  seu  benevolentiam  Dei  erga  nos. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  121 

I  Cor.  vi.  1 1.  The  connection  of  this  fact  with  the  use  of  the  names 
of  the  three  Persons  of  the  Trinity  in  the  formuhi  of  Baptism,  is 
obvious  and  suggestive. 

2.   Uic  Ground  of  Justification. 

This,  known  as  the  meritorious  cause,  causa  uicritoria,  is  the 
whole  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  which  he  has  atoned  for  human 
sins,  and  brought  in  a  complete  and  ev^erlasting  righteousness : 
''Justified  freely*by  the  grace  of  God,  through  the  redemption  that 
is  in  Christ  Jesus,  whom  God  has  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation 
through  faith  in  his  blood,"  Rom.  iii.  24,  25.  In  this  aggregate 
work  of  Christ,  in  which  is  laid  the  deep  and  secure  foun,dation  of 
our  acceptance  and  salvation,  there  are  three  things  to  be  con- 
sidered : 

I.  It  must  be  viewed  as  the  work  of  the  Godniaii.  Both  before 
and  after  the  Reformation  the  question  was  agitated  whether  Christ 
is  our  righteousness,  according  to  his  divine  or  his  human  nature.* 
The  question  was  one  which  touched  upon  a  deep  and  vital  point 
of  Christian  doctrine,  and  the  correct  view  becomes  of  great  im- 
portance. The  view  that  held  to  our  justification  by  Christ's  right- 
eousness, according  to  his  divine  nature  alone,  confounded  the  true, 
essential,  unchangeable  righteousness  of  the  Son  of  God,  in  his  true 
natural  and  essential  divinity,  with  that  vicarious  work  which  forms 
the  meritorious  righteousness  provided  in  his  obedience  and  death, 
and  imputed  to  the  sinner;  whilst  the  view  which  held  that  Christ 
is  our  righteousness  according  to  his  human  nature  alone  failed  to 
include  what  is  indispensable  to  the  efficacy,  value  and  perfection  of 
his  redeeming  work.  We  can  be  justified  only  by  Christ  as  our 
righteousness,  according  to  both  natures. 

It  is  necessary  carefully  to  distinguish  between  the  essential  and 
immutable  holiness  of  the  Son  of  God,  in  his  divine  nature,  and 
that  righteousness  which  he  came  and  wrought  out  tor  our  tallen 
race.  The  essential  holiness  of  that  nature  must  indeed  be  recog- 
nized as  a  necessary  condition  of  his  work  for  us,  but  it  is  different 

*  Peter  Lombardus,  III.,  Sent.  Dist.  19.  Christus  mediator  est  in  quantum 
homo,  nam  in  quantum  Deus  non  Mediator,  sed  xqualis  est  Patri. 

Busaus,  Disp.  de  Persona  Christi  :  Christus  est  mediator  tantum  secundum 
humanam  naturam.  Quoted  from  (jcrh.  Loci  Theol.,  Loc.  XV'IL,  Cap.  2. 
See  Osiandrian  Controversy,  in  Ch.  Hist. 


122  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

from  it.  Neither  his  human  nature  nor  his  divine  nature  intrinsi- 
cally is  the  basis  of  our  justification,  but  the  work  done,  the  life  lived, 
the  obedience  maintained,  the  sufferings  endured  for  us  in  the  one 
person  of  the  Godman.  The  point  is,  that  in  looking  for  the  ground 
of  our  justification  we  are  not  to  regard  the  mtrinsic  character  of 
the  Deity  of  Christ  as  imputed  to  us,  but  the  "  obedience  unto 
death,"  which  he  in  his  sinless  Theanthropic  person  has  provided  as 
the  basis  of  our  pardon  and  acceptance.  It  is  what  he  has  done  and 
furnished  in  the  economy  and  work  of  redemption*.  Because  of  his 
sinless  divine  holiness  he  could  become  our  righteousness,  but  he  has 
actually  become  such  by  all  that,  in  the  unity  of  his  divine-human 
person,  he  has  done  to  supply  what  we  had  not  done,  and  to  release 
us  from  the  consequences  of  our  sins.  This  zvork  of  the  Son  of  God 
for  us  must  be  viewed  as  including  his  incarnation — the  very  act  of 
his  becoming  Godman,  in  which  he  also  becomes  "  our  righteous- 
ness." In  other  words,  he  became  ''our  righteousness"  only  in  his 
becoming  the  Godman  and  the  work  then  wrought  in  the  union  of 
both  natures  for  us.  In  the  Divine  nature  alone  he  could  not  have 
suffered  and  died,  and  without  the  communion  of  the  Divine  with 
the  human  in  the  unity  of  one  person,  the  sufferings  and  obedience 
of  Christ  would  have  lacked  the  infinite  merit  necessary  to  their 
ato'ning  efficacy.  Hence  the  Form  of  Concord  states  with  admir- 
able clearness:  "Christ  is  our  righteousness,  neither  according  to 
the  divine  nature  alone,  nor  yet  according  to  the  human  nature 
alone,  but  the  zvJwlc  Christ,  according  to  botli  natures,  in  or  through 
that  obedience  alone  which  he,  as  God  and  man,  rendered  to  the 
Father  even  unto  death,  and  by  which  he  has  merited  for  us  for- 
giveness of  sins  and  eternal  life."  Epit.  iii.  i.  "In  this  manner 
neither  the  divine  nor  the  human  nature  of  Christ  by  itself  is 
imputed  to  us  for  righteousness,  but  the  obedience  of  the  person 
alone,  who  is  at  the  same  time  God  and  man.  Thus,  too,  the 
disputed  point  concerning  the  indwelling  of  the  essential  righteous- 
ness of  God*  in  us  must  be  rightly  explained.     For  though   God, 

*  This  was  the  precise  form  of  the  error  of  Osiander,  whose  controversies  dis- 
tracted the  Church  for  some  years,  prior  to  the  Form  of  Concord.  Misapplying 
some  of  Luther's  expressions  concerning  the  indwelling  of  Christ  in  the  soul, 
through  faith,  he  represented  Christ  as  the  righteousness  of  the  believer  by 
being  /«  him.  "Through  the  Word  dwelling  in  us,  we  are  justified."  "The 
Gospel  has  two  parts:  the  first,  that  Christ  has  satisfied  the  justice  of  God ;  the 
second,  that  he  purifies  and  justifies  us  from  sin,  by  dwelling  in  us."  Quoted 
from  Wieseler,  Ch.  Hist.  IV.,  pp.  470,  471. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  23 

the  Father,  Son,  and    Holy  Ghost,  who  is  the  eternal  and  essential 

9  . 

righteousness,  dwells,  through  faith,  in  the  elect,  who  are  justified 
through  Christ  and  reconciled  to  God  (for  all  Christians  are  temples 
of  God,  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost),  yet  this  indwelling  of 
God  is  not  that  righteousness  of  faith  concerning  which  St.  Paul 
speaks,  and  which  he  calls  jiistitia  Dei,  that  is,  the  righteousness  of 
God,  on  account  of  which  we  are  justified  before  God."* 

2.  It  embraces  Christ's  active  obedience  for  us.  The  whole  of 
Christ's  earthly  work  must  be  regarded  as  vicarious.  To  act  in  our 
stead,  He  was  "made  under  the  law."  His  incarnation,  in  which  is 
seen  the  incipient  act  in  his  becoming  ''our  righteousness,"  was  pre- 
paratory not  only  to  suffering  for  our  sins,  but  to  fulfilment  of  the 
law  for  us.  An  atonement,  made  by  sacrificial  death,  releasing  from 
an  incurred  penalty,  is  in  itself  not  the  full  bringing  in  of  a  perfect 
righteousness  by  the  imputation  of  which  we  will  have  all  that  we 
need.  More  than  the  negative  condition  of  being  simply  pardoned, 
is  necessary.  We  need  to  be  looked  upon  as  if  we  were  positively 
righteous.  The  obedience  of  Christ,  in  which  the  law  was  kept  and 
honored,  was  an  essential  element  in  furnishing  for  us  what  the  Law 
and  holiness  of  God  demanded  of  us.  Where  we  were  sinners,  he, 
acting  mediatorially  in  a  vicarious  life,  was  perfectly  righteous. 
This  sinless  active  obedience  of  the  Godman,  must  be  viewed  not 
simply  as  a  needful  condition  to  an  efficaciously  atoning  death,  but 
as  being  in  itself  an  essential  part  of  that  righteousness  which  is  im- 
puted to  us.  Before  men  could  inherit  the  blessings  promised  to 
obedience,  the  Divine  Substitute  had  to  fulfil  for  them  all  its  holy 
precepts.  Buddeus  has  presented  the  truth  clearly :  "  Christ  did  not 
only  expiate  our  sins  by  his  sufferings  and  death,  but  through  his 
whole  life  most  completely  fulfilled  the  law  in  our  stead.  He  thus 
made  satisfaction  for  us,  not  only  by  a  most  precious  sacrifice  to 
offended  Deity,  but  also  by  performing  everything  which  the  divine 
justice,  so  infinitely  offended  by  the  sins  of  men,  could  demand. 
Thus  all  obligation  to  punishment  ceased  and  was  taken  away,  and 
God,  being  thus  reconciled,  is  prepared  to  forgive  all  our  sins,  and 
to  receive  us  into  the  number  of  his  children,  when  we  embrace  the 
merits  of  Christ  in  true  faith."  f 

*Form  Con.,  Uecl.  III. 

\  Buddeus,  Inst.  Theol.  Dog.,  Lib.  IV.,  Sec.  37  :  Xon  tantum  Christus  passione 
et  morte  sua  nostra  peccata  expiavit,  sed  per  totam  vitam,  legem  divinam  pro 


124  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  inclusion  of  Christ's  active  obedience  in  the  ground  of  justi- 
fication is  a  point  of  great  importance.  From  the  earHest  ages  of 
the  Christian  Church  much  stress  was  laid  on  this  part  of  his  work. 
Though  his  death  has  always  been  recognized  as  the  crown  of  his 
saving  love,  his  work  was  i-epresented  as  carried  on  through  all  the 
stages  of  his  life.  This  truth  is  involved  in  the  well-known  passage 
in  Irenaeus,  in  which  he  speaks  of  Christ's  advancing  through  in- 
fancy, youth,  and  manhood,  saving  all  ages,  by  living  and  acting 
for  all.*  Both  the  perfect  obedience  of  Christ,  and  the  shedding  of 
his  blood  as  a  ransom,  unite  in  the  system  of  Irenaeus,  but  he  seems 
to  have  held  the  idea  of  a  sacrifice  in  the  background.  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  mentions  it,  as  an  element  in  the  work  of  redemption,  that 
Christ  maintained  a  pure  disposition  through  all  the  moments  of 
his  life,  t  In  the  scholastic  age  the  active  obedience  of  Christ  con- 
tinued to  hold  a  high  place  in  theological  representations  of  the 
Redeemer's  vicarious  work.  So  prominently  did  Ansclm  (A.  D., 
1093-1 109,)  make  this,  that  in  the  history  of  doctrines  it  is  made  a 
questiofi  whether  he  did  not  altogether  exclude  the  Satisfaciio  pas- 
siva  from  his  view  of  Redemption. | 

Some  modern  theologians,  however,  exclude  the  active  obedience 
of  Christ  from  being,  immediately  and  in  itself,  a  part  of  the  ground 
of  justification.  They  admit  that  this  obedience  was  indeed  neces- 
sary, but  only  as  a  condition  pre-requisite  to  fit  him  to  offer  a  pure 
and  acceptable  sacrifice.  Had  he  himself  sinned,  his  sufferings  could 
not  be  regarded  as  vicarious  and  accruing  to  the  benefit  of  others. 
They  connect  his  active  obedience,  not  with  the  provision  of  a 
righteousness  for  us,  but  with  his  qualification  to  furnish  an  effectual 
vicarious  sacrifice.  A  just  and  full  view  of  Christ's  work,  as  the 
ground  of  our  justification,  must  pronounce  this  theory  defective  and 

nobis  accuratissime  implevit;  et  ita  pro  nobis  satisfecit,  dum  non  tantum  sacri- 
ficio  infiniti  valoris  iratiim  Deum  placavit,  sed  et  ea  omnia  accurate  praestitit, 
quae  justitia  divina  hominum  peccatis  infinitum  in  modum  laesa,  exigere  poterat; 
adeo  ut  omnis  obligatio  ad  poenam  cesset,  prorsusque  sit  sublata,  Deus  vero 
utpote  hac  ratione  reconciliatus,  omnia  peccata,  quae  admiserunt,  modo  vera 
fide  meritum  Christi  apprehendant,  illis  remittere  et  condonare  eosque  in  num- 
erum  filiorum  suorum  recipere  paratus  sit. 

*Iren,  II.,  224. 

f  Hagenbach,  Hist.  Doc,  I.,  p.  380. 

I  See  Neander,  Hist.  Dog,,  p.  517,  and  Hagenbach,  Hist,  Doc,  II.,  p.  38. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  25 

inadequate.  If  the  doctrine  is  correct,  which  presents  the  righteous- 
ness by  which  we  are  justified  as  not  the  intrinsic  hohness  of  the 
Saviour's  divine  nature,  but  the  work  done  by  liim  in  Ids  Tlican- 
tJiropic  Person,  on  bclialf  of  sinners,  it  follows  directly  and  neces- 
sarily, that  we  must  regard  him  as  not  only  furnishing  a  basis  of 
pardon  by  his  innocent  sufferings,  but  a  ground  of  acceptance  by 
fulfilling  for  us  all  righteousness.  Hence  whilst  the  Confession  is 
silent  on  this  precise  point,  the  authors  of  the  Form  of  Concord, 
who  have  most  sharply  and  correctly  presented  the  full  doctrine  of 
this  Article,  have  included  the  Satisfactio  activa  in  varied  and  em- 
phatic phrase.  They  ground  justification  on  " the  entire  obedience 
of  the  ti'hole  Christ^  They  mention  both  his  "  obedience,"  and  his 
"  bitter  sufferings,"  as  included.  "  Faith  looks  upon  the  person  of 
Christ,  as  the  same  was  made  under  the  law  for  us,  bore  our  sins, 
and  when  proceeding  to  the  Father  rendered  entire  and  perfect  obe- 
dience to  his  heavenly  Father  for  us  poor  sinners,  from  his  holy 
birth  unto  his  death;  and  thereby  covered  all  our  disobedience 
which  inheres  in  our  nature,  in  its  thoughts,  words,  and  deeds." 
Hence  that  righteousness,  which  is  imputed  to  faith,  or  to  believers, 
before  God,  through  grace  alone,  is  the  obedience,  the  sufferings, 
and  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  by  which  he  has  rendered  complete 
satisfaction  unto  the  law  for  us,  and  made  expiation  for  our  sins. 
For,  since  Christ  is  not  only  man,  but  God  and  man  in  one  undi- 
vided person,  he  was  as  little  subject  to  the  law,  being  Lord  of  the 
law,  as  it  would  have  been  necessary  for  him  to  suffer  and  die  for 
his  own  person.  ''His  obedience,  therefore,  not  only  in  suffering  and 
dying,  but  in  Jus  being  voluntarily  put  tender  the  law  in  our  stead,  and 
fulfilling  it  zuith  such  obedience,  is  imputed  unto  us  for  righteoicsness  ; 
so  that,  for  the  sake  of  this  perfect  obedience,  ivhich  he  rendered  unto 
his  heavenly  Father  for  us,  in  both  doing  and  suffering,  in  his  life  and 
death,  God  forgives  us  our  sins,  accounts  us  as  righteous  and  Just,  and 
saves  us  eternally y  * 

Scripture  proof  of  the  correctness  of  this  view  may  be  seen  by 
a  reference  to  a  few  passages.  Rom.  v.  19,  St.  Paul  declares,  "As 
by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were  made  sinners;  so  by  the  obe- 
dience of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous."  The  reference  is  ad- 
mitted to  be  to  the  justification  of  the  sinner  through  Christ.    Were 


*Form  Con..  Dec,  Art.  III. 


126  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

it  based  on  his  death  alone,  the  use  of  the  different  and  comprehen- 
sive term  obedience  would  be  unaccountable.  It  may,  and  must,  in- 
deed, be  recrarded  as  including  his  "  odedienee  unto  deathy  or  his 
suffering,  but  refers  more  directly  to  the  aggregate  work  of  satisfy- 
ing the  demands  of  the  law.  From  the  antithesis  of  the  word  to 
the  disobedience  of  Adam,  his  active  obedience,  rather  than  his  suf- 
ferings, seems  to  be  the  prominent  idea.*  "  The  entire  holy  life  of 
our  Saviour,"  says  Tholuck,  "  is  termed  vnaKot),  embracing  in  indi- 
visible unity  what  the  Church  has  termed  \.\\&  obedientia  activa,  and 
obedientia  passivaT  In  loco.  In  v.  i8,  the  apostle  expresses  the 
same  idea  in  another  form  :  "  By  the  righteousness,  iiKaiCiiiaroq,  of  one 
the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  justification,  diKaluaiv^  of  life." 
In  this  passage  the  term  '•' rigJiteousncss"  seems  to  be  the  equiva- 
lent oV obedience^  in  v.  19.  They  are  alike  connected  with  justifi- 
cation, and  are  terms  of  more  comprehensive  import  than  would 
have  been  used  had  the  apostle  nothing  in  his  view  but  Christ's 
death.  The  same  doctrine  is  implied  in  Ps.  xl.  8,  compared  with 
John  iv.  34. 

3.  It  is  completed  in  Christ's  passive  obedience.  The  Confession 
gives  prominence  to  this  because  it  presents  the  most  central  con- 
ception of  the  atonement.  As  the  basis  of  justification  it  refers  to 
the  great  unparalleled  fact,  "  Christ  suffered" — "made  satisfaction 
for  our  transgressions  by  his  death." 

The  most  casual  reading  of  the  Scriptures  is  sufficient  to  impress 
every  one  with  a  conviction  of  the  vital  relation  of  Christ's  suffer- 
ings and  death  with  the  sinner's  salvation.  Text  follows  text,  and 
declaration  is  added  to  declaration  to  keep  Jesus  before  the  sinner's 
view  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world." 

The  Old  Testament  points  to  this  part  of  his  mediatorial  and  sav- 
ing work  in  type  and  shadow,  bleeding  victims  and  smoking  altars, 
temple  arrangements  and  prophetic  announcements.  Isaiah  directs 
to  a  suffering  Saviour,  stricken,  smitten,  making  his  soul  an  offering 
for  sin,  and  justifying  many  because  of  bearing  their  iniquities. 
Daniel  beholds  him  as  cut  off,  but  not  for  himself  In  the  New  Tes- 
tament we  hear  Christ  himself  declare,  as  he  approaches  the  dread- 
ful hour,  "  For  this  purpose  I  came  unto  this  hour."  And  though 
his  disciples  at  first  could  not  understand  this,  and  stumbled  at  it, 

*  See  Hodsre  in  loco. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  12/ 

after  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  leading  them  into  the  truth, 
they  were  ready  to  exclaim,  "  God  forbid  that  I  should  glory  save 
in  the  cross  of  Christ."  They  resolved  to  know  nothing  among 
men  but  Christ  and  him  crucified,  and  preached  this  as  the  power 
of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  God  unto  salvation.  It  is  made  the 
ceaseless  theme  of  the  Word  cf  God. 

The  sufferings  of  the  Redeemer  have  their  relation  to  the  punish- 
ment due  our  sins.  As  his  life  fulfilled  all  the  requirements  of  the 
law  in  our  stead,  his  agony  and  death  satisfied  all  the  penalty  de- 
nounced upon  our  transgressions.  "  The  wages  of  sin  is  death." 
But  "when  we  were  yet  without  strength  in  due  time  Christ  died 
for  the  ungodly,"  Rom.  v.  6.  God  "  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for 
us  who  knew  no  sin,  that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of 
God  in  him,"  2  Cor.  v.  2i.  "  The  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  min- 
istered unto,  but  to  minister  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many," 
Matt.  XX.  28.  The  Church  is  spoken  of  as  "  the  Church  of  God 
which  he  hath  purchased  with  his  own  blood,"  Acts  xx.  28.  "  Christ 
hath  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for 
us,"  Gal.  iii.  13.  "Whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation, 
through  faith  in  his  blood,"  Rom.  iii.  25.  "  Christ  died  for  our  sins 
according  to  the  Scriptures,"  i  Cor.  xv.  3.  "Christ  our  passover  is 
sacrificed  for  us,"  i  Cor.  v.  7.  "  God  commendeth  his  love  towards 
us  in  that  while  we  were  sinners  Christ  died  for  us.  Much  more 
then,  being  now  justified  by  his  blood,  we  shall  be  saved  from  wrath 
through  him,"  Rom.  v.  8,  9.  "  We  also  joy  in  God,  by  whom  we 
have  now  received  the  atonement,"  Rom.  v.  Ii.  "Neither  by  the 
blood  of  goats  and  calves,  but  by  his  own  blood,  he  entered  once 
into  the  holy  place,  having  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us," 
Heb.  ix.  12.  "Christ  was  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many," 
Heb.  ix.  28.  "  Forasmuch  as  ye  know  that  ye  were  not  redeemed 
with  corruptible  things,  as  silver  and  gold,  from  your  vain  conversa- 
tion received  by  tradition  from  your  fathers,  but  with  the  precious 
blood  of  Christ,"  i  Pet.  i.  18,  19.  "Who  his  own  self  bare  our 
sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,"  i  Pet.  ii.  24.  These  passages  and 
many  others,  illuminating  all  the  pages  of  the  New  Testament  with 
the  light  of  redemption,  set  forth  unequivocally,  and  with  all  the 
fervor  of  the  Gospel  message,  that  Christ  in  the  unity  of  his  two 
natures  in  one  person,  and  acting  in  a  vicarious  character,  bore  the 
curse  and  punishment  due  to  us,  expiated  all  our  offences,  honored 


128  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

and  satisfied  the  law,  so  that  God  might  be  just,  and  yet  pardon  and 
accept  the  ungodly. 

The  reason  why,  since  the  fall,  such  vicarious  obedience  and 
suffering  are  necessary  to  the  sinner's  forgiveness  and  salvation,  is 
found  in  the  necessity  of  maintaining  the  inviolable  sanctity  of  the 
Divine  law  and  holiness.  The  wicked  could  not  be  justified  on  the 
simple  ground  of  repentance  and  reformation.  Repentance  and 
refoimation  can  have  no  atoning  power  over  the  past.  It  can 
neither  satisfy  the  penalty  of  the  broken  law,  nor  vindicate  the  holi- 
ness and  justice  of  God  against  the  fearful  crime  of  already  com- 
mitted sin.  God  must  "  declare  his  righteousness,"  as  well  as  set 
forth  his  mercy.  Thus  the  glorious  message  of  salvation  does  not 
come  as  a  departure  from  justice,  or  any  relaxation  of  its  demands, 
but  offers  its  gracious  blessings  through  the  substitutionary  fulfilment 
of  both  the  practical  and  penal  requirements  of  the  law,  by  which 
mercy  and  truth  have  met  together,  and  unite  in  perfect  harmony.* 
"  Once  for  altogether,  Christ  has  done  enough  to  remove  the  sins 
of  all  who  come  to  him  and  believe  on  him."     Luth.,  on  i  Pet.  iii.  i8. 

3.   TJie  Nature  of  yustification. 

In  the  brief  but  clear  terms  of  the  Confession,  amplified  in  the 
Apology  and  Form  of  Concord,  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  and  of 
our  Church  on  this  point  is  most  satisfactorily  defined.  Justifica- 
tion is  mentioned  as  "  the  remission  of  sins,"  and  the  bestowal  upon 
us  of  "  righteousness  and  eternal  life."  The  three  essential  elements 
of  its  nature  are  here  involved: 

I.  Its  judicial  and  objective  character.f     In  this,  it  contains  a  clear 

*  Augustine,  Ps.  100.  Homines  quando  judicunt,  aliquando  victi  miseri- 
cordia  faciunt  contra  justitiam,  et  videtur  in  eis  esse  misericordia  et  non  esse 
judicium,  aliquando  vero  rigidum  volentes  tenere  judicium,  perdunt  misericor- 
diam.  Deus  autem  nee  in  bonitate  misericordiae  perdit  judicii  severitatem,  nee 
in  judicando  cum  severitate  amiUit  misericordiae  bonitatem. 

t  Chemnitz.  Paulus  articulum  justificationis  ubique  describit  tanquam  pro- 
cessum  judicialem,  quod  conscientia  peccatoris  coram  tribunali  Dei  lege  divina 
accusata,  convicta  et  sententiae  aeternae  damnationis  subjecta,  confugiens  ad 
thronum  gratia  restituitur,  absolvitur  et  a  sententia  damnationis  liberata,  ad 
vitam  aeternam  acceptatur,  propter  damnationem  et  intercessionem  filii  Dei 
mediatoris,  quae  fide  apprehenditur  et  applicatur. 

Quenstedt  (III.,  526).  Justificatio  est  actus  Sanctissimae  Trinitatis  externus, 
judicialis,  gratiosus,  quo  hominem   peccatorem  gratis  propter  Christi  meritum 


JUSTIFICATION    P.Y    FAITH.  I  29 

and  al:)solute  repudiation  of  tlie  theory,  which  had  been  maintained, 
and  still  is,  by  Romish  and  some  Protestant  theologians.  Over 
against  all  the  notion  of  justification  by  an  inherent  righteous- 
ness, confounding  justification  with  sanctification,  the  Reformers 
rigorously  asserted  the  objective  and  forensic  nature  of  this  act, 
as  an  essential  distinction  in  sound  and  Biblical  theology.  Al- 
though the  language  of  Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  is,  in  a  few 
cases,  ambiguous  on  this  point,  undoubtedly  the  whole  tenor  of  it, 
and  many  distinct  and  definitive  passages,  set  forth  its  nature  as  out- 
ward and  judicial.  And  the  Form  of  Concord  declares,  "  If  we  wish 
to  retain  in  its  'purity  the  Article  concerning  justification,  great 
diligence  and  care  are  to  be  observed,  lest  that  which  precedes  faith 
and  that  which  follows  it,  be  at  the  same  time  intermingled  and 
introduced  into  the  Article  concerning  justification,  as  necessary 
and  pertaining  to  it.  For  it  is  not  one  and  the  same  thing  to  speak 
of  conversion  and  justification."  "For,  though  the  converted  and 
believing  have  an  incipient  renewal,  sanctification,  love,  virtue,  and 
good  works,  yet  these  cannot  and  must  not  be  referred  to  the  article 
of  justification  before  God,  and  confounded  with  it;  so  that  Christ 
the  Redeemer  may  not  be  deprived  of  his  glory,  and  troubled  con- 
sciences may  not,  since  our  new  obedience  is  still  imperfect  and 
impure,  be  robbed  of  their  sure  consolation." 

The  proof  of  the  external  and  forensic,  or  perhaps,  more  pro- 
perly, governmental  nature  of  justification,  is  made  manifest  by  a 
reference  to  a  {q.\v  passages  of  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  inv^olved  in 
the  use  of  the  word  to  justify.  The  Hebrew  p"l^,  translated  by  the 
Seventy  into  the  Greek  words,  rf^wz^oiT,  f^iKaovadai,  diKa/ov,  Kplvsiv,  which 
are  used  in  the  New  Testament  to  express  this  truth,  includes  the 
idea  of  an  objective  forensic  acquittal.*  Ex.  xxiii.  7,  "  I  will  not 
justify  the  wicked,"  refers  to  no   inner  change,  but  to  a  relation  to 

fide  apprehensum  remissis  peccatis,  justum  reputat,  in  gloriosae  graiiae  ac  jus- 
titiae  laudem  et  justificatorum  saliitem. 

Hollaz.  Justificatio  est  actus  judicialis  isque  gratiosus,  quo  Deus  satisfactione 
Christ!  reconciliatus  peccatorem  in  Christum  credentem,  ab  objectis  criminibus 
absolvit  et  justum  aestimat  atque  declarat.  Quae  actio,  cum  sit  e.xtra  hominem 
in  Deo,  non  potest  hominem  intrinsecus  mutare. 

*p~'i  in  Kal  est  justitiam  habere,  in  Piel  justitiam  alicui  tribuere.  in  Hiphil 
in  judicio  aliquam  absolvere  et  justitium  pronunciare,  in  Hithpael,  se  ipsum 
justificare  et  causm  suiu  bonitatem  demonstrate.  Gerh.,  Loc.  TheoL,  Locus  De 
Justificatione,  Prooe.,  g  III. 


130  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  law.  In  Prov.  xvii.  15,  "  He  that  justifieth  the  wicked  and  he 
that  condenineth  the  innoeent  are  both  an  abomination  in  the  sight 
of  the  Lord,"  the  antithesis  is  between  justification  and  condemna- 
tion, and  both  are  objective  in  their  character.  In  Matt.  xii.  37, 
"  By  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  justified,  and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt 
be  condemned,"  there  is  no  idea  of  an  inner  change,  but  a  forensic 
decision.  In  Rom.  v.  18,  19,  and  throughout  the  chapter,  the  na- 
ture of  this  doctrine  is  distinctly  unfolded,  and  it  is  set  forth  in  the 
clearest  light  as  judicial  and  external.  It  is  wrapped  up  in  legal 
terms  and  relations.  The  phraseology  implies  a  judge,  guilt  before 
the  law,  and  an  acquittal,  by  virtue  of  "  the  righteousness  of  One  " 
who  has  made  an  "  atonement."  The  judgment  is  to  condemnation, 
«f  KaraKpt/ja,  the  gracc,  to  justification,  hg  SiKdiumg.  "Who  shall  lay 
any  thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  It  is  God  that  justifieth," 
Rom.  viii.  33,  implies  a  judicial  accusation,  and  a  free  divine  absolu- 
tion. Most  plainly  is  this  aspect  of  truth  included  in  the  represent- 
ation of  justification  in  2  Cor.  v.  1 9-2 1  :  "  God  was  in  Christ,  recon- 
ciling the  world  unto  Himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto 
them.  *  *  *  For  He  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no 
sin,  that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him."  A 
corre.spondence  is  thus  traced  between  it  and  the  way  in  which 
Christ  was  made  sin  for  us.  We  are  made  "  righteousness "  in 
Christ,  in  the  same  manner  as  he  was  made  sin  for  us.  But  Christ 
was  not  made  sin  for  us  by  actually  becoming  a  sinner,  but  by  bear- 
ing our  sins  imputativeiy.  So  we  are  justified,  not  by  being  made 
intrinsically  righteous,  or  by  an  infusion,  but  only  actn  foroisi.'^  In 
short,  the  word  to  justify  means,  properly  and  generically,  to  pro- 
nounce any  one  righteous,  either  when  he  truly  is  so,  or  is  really 
unrighteous.  And  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  in  the  justification 
of  the  believer,  the  person  is  in  fact  a  sinner,  and  the  act  is  not  a 
declaration  of  real  moral  character.  It  is  not  a  divine  judgment  in 
reference  to  the  moral  condition  of  its  object,  but  a  holding  of  the 
truly  guilty  as  acquitted  for  the  sake  of  the  vicarious  sacrifice  and 
righteousness  of  Jesus  Christ. 

2.  It  consists  partly  in  pardon.  "  Forgiveness  of  sins  before 
God,"  "  for  Christ's  sake  our  sins  are  remitted  to  us,"  are  the 
phrases  in  which  our  Confession  describes  it.     The  frequency  with 

*See  Cotta's  Note,  Ger.  Loci,  Locus  XVIL 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I3I 

which  it  sets  it  forth  by  these  terms,  indicates  how  accurately  and 
fully  they  were  regarded  as  expressing  its  nature.  Forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  justification  before  God,  are  used  as  interchangeable  terms, 
though  in  fact  justification  was  acknowledged  as  including  in  its  full 
meaning  somewhat  more  than  pardon.  The  Scriptures  themselves 
use  the  word  justification,  as  an  equivalent  to  forgiveness.  St.  Paul, 
in  describing  justification,  Rom.  iv.  7,  8,  quotes  as  an  Old  Testa- 
ment statement  of  it,  the  words  of  David,  "  Blessed  are  they  whose 
iniquities  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  are  covered.  Blessed  is  the 
man  to  whom  the  Lord  will  not  impute  sin."  So,  too,  in  Acts  xiii. 
38,  39 :  "  Be  it  known  unto  you,  therefore,  men  and  brethren,  that 
through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you  the  forgiveness  of  sins:  and 
by  him  all  that  believe  are  justified  from  all  things  from  which  ye 
could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of  Moses."  On  the  divine  basis 
of  Christ's  atonement,  in  which  the  penalty  of  sin  has  been  suffered 
and  the  law  satisfied,  God  freely  forgives  the  penitent  and  believing 
sinner  all  his  transgressions.  On  the  ground  of  that  death  of  the 
Just  for  the  unjust,  our  offenses  are  wholly  blotted  out.  The  sinner 
is  pardoned  and  looked  upon  in  Christ,  as  though  he  had  never 
sinned.  It  is  a  full  absolution.  He  is  acquitted  of  all  charges  and 
released  from  all  penalties.  God  no  longer  imputes  or  charges  to 
the  sinner  the  offences  of  which  he  had  been  guilty.  There  is  now 
no  condemnation,  to  them  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus. 

3.  It  is  completed  in  the  imputation  of  Chrisfs  rigJitcoitsness. 
This  meets  the  necessities  of  the  sinner's  case,  in  a  relation  which 
reaches  beyond  the  simple  matter  of  pardon.  Being  forgiven,  he  is 
not  left  in  the  condition  of  a  criminal  merely  released  from  punish- 
ment. He  needs  be  held  not  only  as  absolved  from  wrath,  but  as  hav- 
ing an  acceptable  righteousness.  His  condition  must  not  be  a  mere 
negation,  but  one  of  positive  fullness.  Divested  ^like  of  his  own  sins 
and  righteousness,  he  is  not  to  be  held  henceforth  as  miserable  and 
poor  and  naked,  but  as  clothed  in  spotless  garments  and  made  rich 
indeed.  Hence,  in  the  very  act  of  justification,  along  with  the  non- 
imputation  of  his  sins,  God  imputes  Christ's  perfect  righteousness  to 
him.  Thus,  while  pardgn  takes  away  from  the  sinner  what  he  has, 
this  imputation  gives  him  what  he  has  not.  On  one  side  the  pen- 
alty of  his  transgressions  is  removed,  and  on  the  other,  the  complete 
righteousness  of  the  Redeemer  is  placed  to  his  account.  The  two 
sides  of  his  need  are  thus  fully  meet,  in  the  substitutionary  provision 


132  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  saving  grace.  The  accuracy  and  beauty  of  the  language  of  the 
Confession  is,  therefore,  plainly  seen,  when,  in  addition  to  pardon,  it 
declares  "  righteousness  and  eternal  life  are  bestowed  upon  us." 
"  For  God  regards  this  faith,  and  imputes  it  as  righteousness  in  his 
sight,  Rom.  iii.  and  iv." 

This  is  the  great  doctrine  of  the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteous- 
ness, which  stands  so  centrally  in  the  faith  of  orthodox  Protestantism. 
It  presents  with  vigor  that  grand  and  comforting  truth  of  the 
Gospel,  that  the  believer  is  ''complete  in  Christ  who  is  the  Head  of 
all  principality  and  power."  Able  to  work  out  for  himself  neither 
pardon  nor  righteousness,  both  are  provided  in  the  Saviour's  work, 
and  freely  and  fully  bestowed  upon  him  in  justification.  Merely  to 
forgive  the  sinner,  and  let  him  go,  would  not  be  a  restoration  to  the 
blessedness  of  the  Divine  favor  from  which  he  is  fallen.  He  needs 
to  be  taken  back,  and  treated  as  righteous,  in  the  fullness  of  fellow- 
ship and  love.  He  is  not  left  poor,  but  made  rich.  "  For  your 
sakes  He  became  poor,  that  ye  through  his  poverty  might  be  rich." 
2  Cor.  viii.  9.  He  is  clothed  in  the  wedding  garment,  Matt.  xxii. 
2-13.  "Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness,  to  every 
one  that  believeth,"  Rom.  x.  4.  Instead  of  his  own  sin,  the  obedi- 
ence of  him  who  is  "the  Lord,  our  righteousness"  is  imputed  to 
him.  "  For  what  saith  the  Scripture?  Abraham  believed  God,  and 
it  was  imputed  unto  him  for  righteousness.  Now  to  him  that 
worketh  is  the  reward  not  reckoned  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  But  to 
him  that  worketh  not,  but  believeth  on  him  that  justificth  the  un- 
godly, his  faith  is  counted  for  righteousness.  Even  as  David  also 
describeth  the  blessedness  of  the  man  unto  whom  God  imputeth 
righteousness  without  works,"  Rom.  iv.  3-6.  The  fact  that  some- 
times the  "righteousness  of  Christ,"  and  at  other  times,  our  "  faith," 
is  said  to  be  imputed  to  us,  involves  no  contradiction.  For  faith  is 
introduced  merely  as  apprehending  and  appropriating  the  righteous- 
ness which  is  then  set  down  to  our  account.  Moreover,  in  the  dis- 
tinction made  between  pardon  and  this  imputation,  we  are  not  to 
suppose  any  real  division  of  the  act  of  justification.  Though  for- 
giveness of  sins  is  based  entirely  on  Christy's  atoning  work,  and  the 
imputation  of  his  righteousness  implies  a  reference  to  his  whole 
obedience  for  us,  our  acceptance  of  Christ  secures  the  benefit  of 
both,  which  are  thus  united  in  the  same  act  of  justification.  The 
one  divine  act  of  justification  brings  us  both  pardon  of  our  past  sins 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  33 

and  the  imputation  of  Christ's  perfect  righteousness.  It  is,  also,  in 
this  way  clearly  distinguished  from  a  divine  judgment  upon  the  in- 
trinsic character  of  the  sinner,  and  becomes  a  free  declaration  of  a 
gracious  absolution  and  acceptance  of  the  really  guilty.  And  the 
whole  nature  of  the  act  is  summed  up  vigorously  in  the  Form  of 
Concord,  "We  believe,  teach,  and  confess  *  *  *  that  poor  sin- 
ful man  is  justified  before  God,  that  is,  absolved  and  declared  free 
from  his  sins,  and  from  the  sentence  of  his  well-deserved  condem- 
nation, and  is  adopted  as  a  child  and  heir  of  eternal  life,  without 
any  merit  or  worthiness,  and  without  any  antecedent,  present  or 
subsequent  works,  out  of  pure  grace,  for  the  sake  of  the  merit, 
the  perfect  obedience,  the  bitter  sufferings  and  death,  and  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  our  Lord  alone,  whose  obedience  is  imputed  unto  us 
for  righteousness." 

4.   Tlie  Relation  of  Faith  to  Justification. 

The  Confession  declares  we  are  justified  "through  faith — perfideni, 
durch  den  glaubcn.  These  terms  express  the  instrumental  cause  of 
justification.  This  point  is  of  such  vital  importance,  and  lies  so 
truly  in  the  very  heart  of  this  great  doctrine  of  our  Church,  that  its 
meaning  and  relations  cannot  be  too  accurately  and  fully  grasped. 
The  very  characterizing  feature  of  the  Gospel  is,  that  it  presents 
salvation  as  attained  through  faith.  It  so  fully  expresses  the  essence 
of  the  system,  that  "the  faith,"  is  made  a  synonym  of  Christianity. 
And  both  the  object  and  the  power  of  the  Reformation,  consisted  in 
the  disclosure  of  the  full  and  indubitable  relation  of  faith  to  the  sin- 
ner's justification  and  salvation.  There  are  three  elements  in  which 
its  nature  and  office  are  seen. 

/.  Knoi^.'ledge  is  implied.  This  is  the  first  element  of  the  definition 
of  the  older  theologians,  in  which  faith  is  made  to  consist  in  know- 
ledge, notitia,  assent  of  the  mind,  assensus,  and  confidence  or  trust, 
fiducia.  The  definition  is  to  be  accepted  as,  in  substance,  correct, 
but  it  needs  some  guarding  statements.  Undoubtedly,  the  histori- 
cal facts  and  doctrinal  verities  of  the  Gospel  must  be  known  before 
the  sinner  can  accept  the  hope  and  blessings  they  offer.  Men  must 
know  the  truth  before  it  can  make  them  free.  "And  this  is  eternal 
hfe,  to  know  thee  the  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast 
sent,"  John  xvii.  3.  Conviction  of  sin  and  sense  of  spiritual  need 
are  divinely  wrought  through  the  truth  in  the  hands  of  the  Holy 
10 


134  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Spirit.  Yet,  however  essential  a  knowledge  of  the  objects  of  faith 
may  be  to  its  exercise,  it  is  generically  different  from  faith  itself.  It 
is  rather  a  pre-requisite  to  faith.  "How  shall  they  believe  in  him 
of  whom  they  have  not  heard?"  Rom.  x.  14.  The  contents  of  the 
logical  understanding  are  not  the  same  as  an  act  of  faith.  And 
though  our  Saviour  does  Jio-t  speak  of  knowing,  jiruaneiv,  the  true 
God  and  Jesus  Christ  as  eternal  life,  the  eternal  life  is  not  the  imme- 
diate result  of  the  knowledge,  but  the  knowledge  leads  to  faith, 
according  to  St.  Paul's  words  to  Tmiothy,  "  From  a  child  thou  hast 
known  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto 
salvation,  through  faith  in  yesus  Christ,''  2  Tim.  iii.  15.  Men  may 
have  knowledge,  even  in  richest  stores,  without  a  particle  of  real, 
saving  faith.  A  mere  acquaintance  with  the  historical  truths  and 
wondrous  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  as  treasures  of  the  understand- 
ing, cannot,  in  itself,  unite  the  human  life  to  the  life  of  Christ.  On 
this  point  our  Confessors  fully  rejected  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the 
nature  of  faith.  There  had  been  no  sharp  or  true  distinction  of  es- 
sential faith  from  mere  historical  or  doctrinal  knowledge.  "Our 
adversaries  think  that  faith  consists  in  knowledge  of,  or  an  acquain- 
tance with,  the  history  of  Christ."  *  Art.  XX.,  defining  faith,  de- 
clares, "  The  Scriptures,  speaking  of  faith,  do  not  style  faith  such  a 
knowledge  as  devils  and  wicked  men  have ;  for  it  is  taught  concern- 
ing faith  in  Heb.  xi.  i,  that  a  mere  knowledge  of  the  facts  of  history 
is  not  faith."  The  deep  intensity  of  Luther's  experience,  in  which 
he  came  into  a  true  apprehension  of  the  Gospel  plan,  and  repose  in 
Christ  as  his  Saviour,  necessarily  led  to  a  clear  distinction  of  faith 
from  this  merely  intellectual  knowledge.  It  was  impossible  that  he 
should  teach  a  system  in  which  these  two  things  should  be  con- 
founded. Melanchthon's  experience  concurred  with  Luther's;  and 
the  frequency  with  which  he  repeats,  in  the  Apology,  the  caution 
against  mistaking  knowledge  for  faith,  discloses  how  strongly  he 
wished  to  place  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  on  this  point  over  against 
the  error  of  Rome. 

2.  It  implies  the  assent  of  the  understanding.  These  truths  and 
doctrines  of  Christ  must  not  only  be  known,  but  approved.  Their 
excellence  and  adaptedness  must  be  recognized  in  an  assenting 
judgment  of  the  intellect.     But  here,  as  in  knowledge,  this  assent  is 

*Apol.  Art.  IV.  (II). 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  1 35 

rather  a  condition  precedent  to  saving  faith  than  faith  itself  It  is 
what  may  be  accurately  designated  as  historical  fait/i.  It  is  a  yield- 
ing of  the  judgment  to  the  contents  of  the  knowledge.  "  It  is  not 
enough  for  us  to  know  and  believe  that  Christ  was  born,  that  he 
suffered  and  rose  from  the  dead."  *  This  is  a  belief  which  the 
devils  may  have,  without  any  submission  of  will  or  affections  to 
the  terms  of  pardon  and  salvation.  The  assent  of  reason  to  the 
truth,  divinity,  and  reliableness  of  the  remedial  scheme  of  grace, 
though  essential  as  a  preliminary  basis  for  the  act  of  appropriating 
the  offers  of  salvation,  in  which  the  essence  of  faith  consists,  must 
yet  be  regarded  as  but  partial  and  inadequate.  This  represents  the 
condition  of  the  masses  in  Christian  lands,  who  intellectually  admit 
and  consent  to  the  truth  and  excellence  of  Christianity,  but  who 
live  in  utter  indifference  and  neglect  of  Christ  and  salvation.  The 
reason  of  the  inadequacy  of  this  merely  assenting  judgment  of  the 
mind  is  plain.  It  lies  altogether  in  the  sphere  of  the  natural.  It  is 
only  the  same  kind  of  mental  assent  as  is  given  to  any  other  histor- 
ical or  scientific  truths.  It  implies  no  supernatural  operation,  as  a 
work  of  grace  in  the  heart,  and  fails  to  surrender  the  affections  and 
life  to  the  power  and  control  of  Christ. 

3.  The  essential  thing,  which  itself  constitutes  the  reality  and  ful- 
ness of  faith,  is  Ti'ust  or  Confidence.  It  is  the  fiducia  of  the  old 
theologians,  and  expresses  the  act  in  which  the  penitent  reposes  on 
the  merit  and  grace  of  the  Redeemer.  In  it  he  accepts  Christ,  who 
is  a  perfect  Saviour,  and  lays  an  appropriating  hold  of  him,  as  He 
has  been  made  unto  him  wisdom,  righteousness,  sanctihcation,  and 
redemption.  It  brings  the  believing  soul  and  Christ  together. 
Faith  takes  Christ  just  as  he  is  offered,  in  all  the  fullness  of  his  re- 
demption and  offices  of  salvation,  and  reposes  in  the  infallible  prom- 
ises of  his  love.  It  is  essentially  an  appropriating  act,  and  one  of  self- 
surrender  ;  and  whilst  knowledge  and  assent  belong  wholly  to  the 
logical  understanding,  this  surrender  to  Christ  in  confidence  and 
reliance  embraces  the  action  of  the  will  and  the  sensibilities.  Hence 
St.  Paul  declares,  with  striking  definiteness  and  force,  "  IVitk  the 
heart  man  believeth  unto  righteousness. ''\ 

*Apol.  Art.  IV. 

t  The  error  of  Rome  on  this  point  is  seen  in  the  uords  of  Bellarmin,  Justif. 
i.  4,  Catholici  fidem  in  intellectu  sedem  habere  docent.  Denique  in  ipso  actu 
intellectus. 


o 


6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 


We  must  not  fail  to  understand  that  this  faith  makes  a  real  appro- 
priation of  the  merit  of  Christ.  It  truly  "  puts  on  Christ."  The 
imputation  of  his  righteousness  is  not  to  be  supposed  to  be  based 
.upon  an}'thing  short  of  such  a  vital  union  as  is  expressed  by  the 
apostle,  "  I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me,  and  the  life  I  now 
live,  I  live  by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  who  loved  me  and  gave 
himself  for  me."  It  is  not  by  what  faith  is,  that  it  justifies,  but  by 
what  it  embraces.  It  justifies  not  as  a  virtue,  or  intrinsic  state  of 
the  soul,  but  as  holding  within  its  embrace  Christ  himself,  in  all  his 
work  and  fullness.  The  divine  Judge  does  not  set  over  to  the  be- 
liever's account,  as  a  liquidation  of  his  debt,  and  as  accepted  right- 
eousness, what  his  faith  has  not  really  grasped.  Faith  must,  there- 
fore, be  regarded  as  apprehending  the  gracious  work  and  righteous- 
ness of  Jesus  Christ.  Hence,  Luther's  expression,  "  Faith  taketh 
hold  of  Christ,  and  hath  him  present,  and  holdeth  him  enclosed,  as 
the  ring  doth  the  precious  stone.  And  whosoever  shall  be  found 
having  this  confidence  in  Christ  apprehended  in  the  heart,  him  will 
God  account  for  righteous."  On  Gal.  ii.  16.  "This  is  the  record 
that  God  hath  given  to  us,  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son,"  i 
John  v.  1 1.  Hence  it  is  that  "  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life,  and 
he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  life,"  i  John  v.  12.  Yet 
it  is  not  to  be  understood  that  it  is  Christ's  indzucl/iiig  that  becomes 
the  ground  of  justification,  but  thus  we  are  put  by  faith  in  such  re- 
lation to  him  that  his  zvhole  obedience,  even  unto  death,  is  imputed  to 
us.  It  is  through  such  a  reception  of  him,  in  the  act  of  faith,  that 
we  appropriate  the  benefits  of  his  vicarious  work. 

The  pariiciila  exclnsiva,  the  expression  alone,  by  which  the  Re- 
formers guarded  so  jealously  the  purity  of  the  relation  of  faith  to 
justification,  was  not  only  demanded  by  the  antagonism  of  Rome  to 
it,  but  by  the  interests  of  the  truth  and  the  Church  for  all  ages. 
Against  all  schemes  that  admitted  anything  before,  after,  or  along- 
side of  Christ  apprehended  by  a  divinely  wrought  faith,  it  re- 
asserted the  truth  into  which  the  Holy  Ghost  had  guided  the 
apostle  Paul,  Rom.  iii.  28.  "Therefore  we  conclude  that  a  man  is 
justified  by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law." 

4.  This  faith  is  contemplated  not  as  a  product  of  nature,  but  as  a 
gift  of  God.  In  Art.  II.  it  is,  in  accordance  with  Scripture,  declared 
that  human  nature  since  the  fall  is  so  under  the  power  of  original 
sin  that  it  can  of  its  own  accord  exercise  no  true  faith  in  God.    Con- 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  T37 

sistently  with  this  the  Apology,  Art.  IV.,  sets  forth,  "  Faith  is  the 
acceptance  of  this  treasure  [Christ's  merit]  with  our  whole  heart, 
and  this  is  not  our  own  act,  present,  or  gift,  our  own  work  or  prepa- 
ration." "This  faith  is  a  gift  of  God,  through  which  we  rightly 
acknowledge  Christ  our  Redeemer  in  the  word  of  the  Gospel,  and 
confide  in  him."*  It  is  our  confessional  response  to  the  divine 
word,  "  By  grace  are  ye  saved,  through  faith,  and  that  not  of  your- 
selves ;  it  is  the  gift  of  God,"  Eph.  ii.  8. 

5.  This  act,  as  well  as  the  subsequent  life  of  faith,  is  to  be  rigor- 
ously separated  from  the  idea  of  merit.  Because  of  its  instrumental 
relation,  as  conditioning  our  acceptance  before  God,  there  has  been 
a  disposition  to  look  upon  it  as  itself  a  good  and  meritorious  work. 
There  is  no  deserving  worthiness  in  it.  The  only  worthiness  is  in 
Christ,  and  faith,  being  itself  God's  gift,  is  only  the  hand  that  receives 
the  blessings  of  redemption.  Its  only  activity  is  that  of  accepting 
God's  free  salvation,  and  this  activity  itself  is  through  the  gracious 
operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  author  of  the  Confession,  there- 
fore defines  :  "Faith  does  not  justify  us  before  God,  as  though  it 
were  itself  our  work,  but  solely  because  it  receives  the  grace  prom- 
ised and  offered  without  merit,  and  presented  out  of  the  rich  treas- 
ures of  mercy."t  This  is  fully  accordant  with  the  statements  of 
Scripture  and  the  conclusions  of  reason.  Though  faith  be  accepted 
and  imputed  for  righteousness,  it  is  still,  like  every  other  grace  in 
man,  defective  and  incomplete,  and,  therefore,  cannot  become  a  foun- 
dation of  confidence.  So  soon  as  the  believer  would  trust  to  the 
worthiness  of  his  faith,  he  would  turn  to  something  wrought  within 
him  and  deny  Christ  as  the  only  foundation.  Melanchthon,  to  J. 
Brentz,  i  53  i,  writes,  "  Faith  alone  justifies,  not  because  it  is  the  root, 
or  is  meritorious,  but  because  it  lays  hold  of  Christ,  for  whose  sake 
we  arc  accepted. "|  The  words  of  Luther  to  Brentz  concur  in  sat- 
isfying us  that  this  is  the  doctrine  meant  to  be  set  forth  by  the  Re- 
formers: — "In  order  that  I  may  have  a  better  view  of  this  thing,  I 
am  wont  to  think  of  myself  as  having  in  my  heart  no  such  quality 

*  Form.  Con. 

t  Apol.,  Art.  IV. 

X  Ideo  sola  fide  sunius  justi,  non  quia  radix,  ut  tu  scribis,  sed  quia  appre- 
hendit  Christum,  propter  quern  sunius  accepti.     Corp.  Ref.,  II,  501. 


130  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  faith  or  love  :  but  in  place  of  these,  I  put  Christ  himself,  and  say, 
'  This  is  my  righteousness.'  "  * 

6.  In  the  nature  of  saving  faith,  is  included,  finally,  an  energy 
of  spiritual  transformation  and  fruitfulness.  Though  carefully  dis- 
tinguishing between  justification  and  the  spiritual  change  with  which 
it  is  connected,  our  doctrine  unequivocaHy  asserts,  that  no  other 
faith  becomes  the  instrument  of  justification  than  a  living  and  trans- 
forming one.  It  fully  includes  the  truth  of  St.  James,  "Faith  with^ 
out  works  is  dead."  It  is  no  real  and  living  recipient.  Though  the 
holiness  and  works  wrought  by  faith  have  no  merit,  and  are  not  to 
be  mistaken  as  forming  any  part  of  the  ground  of  justification,  yet 
the  faith  that  does  really  embrace  Christ,  does,  and  must  work  by 
love  and  purify  the  heart.  "  We  speak  of  faith,"  says  the  Apology, 
"as  being  not  an  idle  fancy,  but  a  new  light,  life,  and  power  in  the 
heart,  that  renews  the  heart  and  disposition,  transforms  man  into  a 
new  creature."  "  Faith  wherever,  and  while  it  exists,  bears  good 
fruit."  "  Love  and  works  must  follow  faith."  These  are  its  evi- 
dences and  seals.  They  prove  its  presence,  reality  and  power,  as 
springing  grain  and  blooming  flowers  prove  the  presence  and  power 
of  spring. 

But  as  the  connection  of  faith  with  good  works  forms  the  special 
subject  of  Art.  XX,  no  further  discussion  of  it  is  here  needed,  than 
this  simple  statement  of  the  kind  of  faith  referred  to  by  our  Confes- 
sion in  the  doctrine  of  this  Article. 

We  have  thus  recalled  the  teaching  of  this  Article  on  the  great 
subject  which  it  sets  forth.  Together  with  an  utter  repudiation  of 
the  destructive  error  of  Rome,  it  declares,  in  brief,  but  bold  outline, 
the  true  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  and  of  our  Church.  It  presents  the 
Source  of  Ju.stification  wholly  in  the  free  grace  of  God.  It  asserts 
the  only  Ground  of  it  to  be  found  in  the  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  who, 
as  the  Godman,  taking  the  sinner's  place,  by  his  vicarious  obedi- 
ence and  suffering,  made  satisfaction  to  justice  and  violated  law,  and 
brought  in,  for  the  guilty,  a  perfect  and  everlasting  righteousness. 
The  Nature  of  it  is  not  that  of  an  internal  change,  but  a  forensic  or 
govermental  absolution  of  the  punishment  due  to  sin,  together  with 
an  imputation  of  Christ's  finished  righteousness.  This  pardon  and 
imputation  are  conditioned  solely  in  a  hearty  reception  of  Christ,  in 

*  Neander,  Hist.  Dog.,  p.  663. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  1 39 

a  faith  which  is  itself  the  gift  of  God,  not  meritorious,  but  living  and 
transforming.  And  thus  pardoned  and  accepted  for  Christ's  sake  in 
jjistification,  the  same  faith  to  which  all  this  is  graciously  given, 
takes  Christ  also  for  sanctificatio7i,  in  which,  as  a  divine  internal 
operation,  generically  distinct  from  the  forensic  act  of  justification, 
the  forgiven  sinner  becomes  a  new  creature  in  Christ,  and  is  made 
meet  for  the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light. 

It  only  remains  now,  in  conclusion,  to  note,  briefly,  the  harmony 
of  other  Confessions  and  orthodox  Churches  in  the  es.sential  features 
of  this  doctrine,  with  their  variations  and  differences  from  it  in  some 
of  its  aspects;  and  especially,  to  trace  how  absolutely  and  sharply 
it  cuts  off  from  itself  and  rejects  the  various  errors  of  heterodox 
sects. 

This  is  one  of  the  great  doctrines  in  which  the  Protestant  Churches 
are  essentially  agreed.  The  Augsburg  Confession,  in  accordance 
with  the  grand  design  of  Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  their  co-laborers, 
was  meant  to  set  forth  the  broad,  clear,  and  full  doctrines  of  the 
Gospel  in  their  true  catholicity.  The  Augsburg  Confession  con- 
cludes with  this  assurance  of  its  own  design,  "That  it  might  be 
clearly  perceived,  that  by  us  nothing  is  receiv^ed,  either  in  doctrine 
or  ceremonies,  which  might  be  contrary  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  or 
opposed  to  the  universal  Church."  The  denominational  idea  was 
unknown  to  them;  and  in  declaring  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  they 
designed  the  reformation  of  the  aggregate  church,  and  its  restora- 
tion, in  its  universality,  to  its  old  foundations.  Whilst,  therefore, 
from  its  honorable  priority,  our  Church,  in  its  great  Confession,  took 
no  denominational  position,  and  gave  itself  no  denominational  marks 
and  peculiarities,  others  co-laboring  in  the  general  reformatory  aim, 
but,  as  we  conceive,  on  narrower  ground,  framed  for  themselves 
more  exclusive  creeds  and  defined  their  position  in  denominational 
separation  from  the  Augustana.  It  is  to  be  regretted,  that  subse- 
quently, a  part  of  our  Church,  forsaking  its  original  conception  of 
embodying  only  the  fundamental  truths  of  revived  universal  Chris- 
tianity, and  accepting  the  partisan  or  denominational  idea,  sought 
in  the  Form  of  Concord  to  narrow  our  confessional  basis,  and  de- 
fine and  restrict  it  in  partisan  and  non-fundamental  limitations.  Yet 
the  different  denominations  that  separated  by  distinctive  confessional 
tenets  from  the  general  Confession  at  Augsburg,  have  accepted, 
with  hardly  a  variation,  the  great  and  central  doctrine  of  this  Article. 


140  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

This  happy  agreement  is  made  manifest  by  an  examination  of  some 
of  the  principal  confessions  of  the  different  Reformed  or  Calvinistic 
Churches,  which  took  a  doctrinal  position' denominationally  distinct 
from  the  Church  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

The  Cojifession  of  Basle,  1547,  Art.  IX,  declares,  "  We  acknowl- 
edge the  forgiveness  of  sins  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  the  cruci- 
fied One.  Though  this  faith  continually  exercises,  and  manifests 
itself,  by  works  of  love,  we  do  not  ascribe  righteousness  and  satisfac- 
tion for  our  sins  to  these  works  which  are  fruits  of  faith,  but  solely 
to  true  confidence  and  faith  in  the  shed  blood  of  the  Lamb  of  God."* 

The  Galilean  Confessioji,  adopted  by  the  Reformed  Church  in 
France,  1559,  Art.  XVIII,  says,  "We  rely  upon  the  obedience  of 
Christ  alone,  which  is  imputed  to  us,  so  that  all  our  sins  are  covered, 
and  we  attain  favor  before  God.  Art.  XX,  "  We  believe  that  we 
become  partakers  of  Christ's  righteousness  by  faith  alone  *  *  * 
and  this  occurs  in  such  a  way  that  the  promises  of  life  offered  to  us 
in  Him  (Christ)  are  then  applied  to  our  use,  and  rendered  efficacious 
to  us,  when  we  embrace  them,  not  doubting  that  those  things  will 
be  fulfilled  to  us,  of  which  we  have  been  assured  by  the  mouth  of 
God."t 

In  the  Palatine,  or  Heidelberg  Cateehism,  1563,  probably  the  most 
important  of  all  the  Reformed  Confessions,  Question  60,  "  How  art 
thou  justified  before  God  ?"  is  answered :  "  Only  by  a  true  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ ;  so  that  though  my  conscience  accuse  me  that  I  have 
grossly  transgressed  all  the  commands  of  God,  and  kept  none  of 
them,  and  am  still  inclined  to  all  evil,  notwithstanding  God,  without 
any  merit  of  mine,  but  only  of  mere  grace,  grants  and  imputes  to  me 

*  Confitemur  remissionem  peccatorum  per  fidem  in  Jesum  ChrisUim  crufixum. 
Et  quamvis  haec  Fides  per  opera  charitatis,  se  sine  intermissione  exercet,  exerit, 
atque  ita  probatur :  attamen  justitiam  et  satisfactionem  pro  peccatis  nostris,  non 
tribuimus  operibus,  qu£e  Fidei  fructus  sunt;  sed  tantum  verte  fiducis  et  fidei, 
in  effusum  sanguinem  Agni  Dei. — Quoted  from  Niemeyer,  Coll.  Confess.  Ref., 
p.  98. 

f  Art.  XVIII.,  In  sola  C'nristi  obedientia  prorsus  acquiescimus,  quse  quidem 
nobis  imputantur,  turn  et  tegantur  omnia  nostra  peccato,  turn  etiam  ut  gratiam 
coram  Deo  nanciscamur.  Art.  XX.,  Credimus,  nos  sola  fide  fieri  justitise  parti- 
cipes :  *  *  *  hoc  autem  ideo  fit,  quod  promissiones  vit^e  nobis  in  ipso 
(Christo)  oblatse  tunc  usui  nostro  applicantur  et  nobis  redduntur  efficaces,  cum 
eas  amplectimur,  nihil  ambigentes  nobis  obventura,  de  quibus  ore  Dei  certiores 
fimus. — Quoted  from  Winer,  Dartstel.  des  Lehrbegriffs,  pp.  96,  99. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I4I 

the  perfect  satisfaction,  righteousness  and  holiness  of  Christ ;  even  so, 
as  if  I  never  had  had,  nor  committed  any  sin  ;  yea,  as  if  I  had  fully 
accomplished  all  that  obedience  which  Christ  hath  accomplished  for 
me;  inasmuch  as  I  embrace  such  benefit  with  a  believing  heart."* 

In  its  definition  of  Faith,  it  declares,  "  It  is  not  only  a  certain 
knowledge,  whereby  I  hold  for  truth  all  that  God  has  revealed  to 
us  in  His  word,  but  also  an  assured  confidence,  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  works  by  the  Gospel  in  my  heart|;  that  not  onl}'  to  others  but 
to  me  also,  remission  of  sin,  everlasting  righteousness  and  salvation, 
are  freely  given  by  God,  merely  of  grace,  only  for  the  sake  of 
Christ's  merits." 

Tlie  Second  Helvetic  Confession,  1566,  declares:  "To  justify  is  to 
remit  sins,  absolve  from  guilt  and  punishment,  to  receive  into  favor 
and  declare  righteous.  *  *  *  For  Christ  having  taken  the  sins 
of  the  world  upon  himself,  made  satisfaction  for  them  to  divine  jus- 
tice. Therefore  on  account  of  Christ  alone,  who  suffered  and  rose, 
God  is  merciful  to  our  unrighteousness,  and  does  not  impute  our 
sins  unto  us,  but  imputes  to  us  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  *  *  * 
But  since  we  receive  this  justification,  not  through  any  works,  but 
through  faith  in  Christ  and  the  mercy  of  God,  so  we  teach  and  be- 
lieve with  the  Apostle,  that  the  sinner  is  justified  by  faith  alone  in 
Christ,  not  by  the  law  or  by  any  works ;  *  *  because  faith  re- 
ceives Christ  as  our  righteousness,  and  attributes  all  things  to  the 
grace  of  God  in  Christ,  so  that  justification  is  attributed  to  faith,  alto- 
gether on  account  of  Christ,  and  not  as  our  own  work.  For  it  is 
the  gift  of  God."t 

*  Sola  fide  lesum  Christum,  adeo  ut  licet  mea  me  conscientia  accuset,  quod 
adversus  omnia  mandata  Dei  graviter  peccaverim,  nee  ulium  eorum  servaverim, 
adhasc  etiamnum  ad  omne  malum  propensus  sim,  nihilominus  tamen  (modo 
hasc  beneficia  vera  animi  fiducia  amplectar),  sine  ullo  meo  merito,  ex  mera  Dei 
misericordia,  mihi  perfecta  satisfactio,  justitia  et  sanctitas  Christi,  imputetur  ac 
donetur ;  perinde  ac  si  nee  ullum  ipse  peccatum  admissem,  nee  uUa  mihi  labes 
inhajreret ;  imo  vero  quasi  earn  obedientiam,  quam  pro  me  Christus  praestitit, 
ipse  perfecte  pra^stitissem. — From  Niemyer,  Coll.  Conf.  Ref. 

f  Justificare  significat  Apostolo  in  disputatione  de  justificatione,  peccata  remit- 
tere,  a  culpa  et  poena  absolvere,  in  gratiam  recipere,  et  justum  pronunciare. 
*  *  *  Etenim  Christus  peccata  mundi  in  se  recepit  et  sustulit,  divinajque 
justitise  satisfecit.  Deus  ergo  propter  solum  Christum  passum  et  resuscitatum, 
propitius  est  peccatis  nostris  nee  ilia  nobis  imputat,  imputat  autem  justitiam 
Christo  pro  nostra.     *     *     Quoniam  vero  nos  justificationem  hanc  recepimus, 


142  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

In  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  1562,  the 
definition  of  Justification,  according  to  Dr.  Short,*  was  probably 
derived  from  Melanchthon's  Loci  Covimuiies,  and  thus  closely  har- 
monizes with  the  Augustana,  in  the  declaration  :  "  We  are  accounted 
righteous  before  God  only  for  the  merit  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  by  faith,  and  not  for  our  own  works  and  deservings. 
Wherefore,  that  we  are  justified  by  faith  only,  is  a  most  wholesome 
doctrine,  and  very  full  of  comfort." 

The  Westminster  Confession,  1647,  Chap.  XI,  puts  the  doctrine 
into  minute  specifications :  "  Those  whom  God  effectually  calls,  he 
also  freely  justifies;  not  by  infusing  righteousness  into  them,  but  by 
pardoning  their  sins,  and  by  accounting  and  accepting  their  persons 
as  righteous:  not  for  any  work  wrought  in  them,  or  done  by  them, 
but  for  Christ't  sake  alone:  not  by  imputing  faith  itself,  the  act  of 
believing,  or  any  other  evangelical  obedience,  to  them,  as  their 
righteousness;  but  by  imputing  the  obedience  and  satisfaction  of 
Christ  unto  them,  they  receiving  and  resting  on  him  and  his  right- 
eousness by  faith  ;  which  faith  they  have  not  of  themselves,  it  is  the 
gift  of  God.  Faith,  thus  receiving  and  resting  on  Christ  and  his 
righteousness,  is  alone  the  instrument  of  justification ;  yet  it  is  not 
alone  in  the  person  justified,  but  is  ever  accompanied  with  all  other 
saving  graces,  and  is  no  dead  faith,  but  worketh  by  love." 

This  doctrine  is  expressed  in  similar  terms  in  the  First  Helvetic 
Confession,  1536,  the  Consensus  Tignrimis,  1549,  the  Genevan  Cate-r 
chism,  1545,  the  Belgic  Confession,  1562,  the  Bohemian,  1535,  the 
Remonstrant,  and  other  Confessions.  They  all  agree  in  represent- 
ing justification,  over  against  the  teaching  of  Rome,  as  a  divine  act, 
forensic  in  its  character,  based  alone  on  the  work  and  merit  of' 
Christ,  through  a  true  faith  that  appijehends  and  appropriates  his 
vicarious  obedience  unto  death,  attended  with  renewal  and  good 
works,  which,  without  forming  in  us  the  least  merit,  yet  become  the 
needed  witness  of  the  reality  and  power  of  the  saving  faith.     This 

non  per  uUa  opera,  sed  per  fidem  in  dei  misericordiam  et  Christum,  ideo  doce- 
mus  et  credimus  cum  Apostolo,  hominem  peccatorem  justificare  sola  fide  in 
Christum,  non  lege,  aut  ullis  operibus :  quia  fides  Christum  justitiam  nostram 
recepit  et  gratiae  Dei  in  Christo  omnia  tribuit,  ideo  fidei  tribuitur  justificatio, 
maxime  propter  Christum,  et  non  ideo,  quia  nostrum  opus  est.  Donum  enim 
Dei  est. — Niemyer,  Coll.  Conf.,  p.  494. 
*  Hist.  Ch.  of  Eng.,  Chap.  VI. 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  I  43 

great  heart-doctrine  of  the  Reformation,  in  which  revived  Chris- 
tianity re-asserted  itself,  has,  therefore,  flowed  out,  in  its  essential 
forms,  from  the  great  Confession  at  Augsburg,  and  become  the 
inheritance  of  all  orthodox  Protestantism. 

It  must  be  noted,  however,  as  necessary  to  a  true  and  full  view  of 
this  point,  that  though  the  article  of  justification,  in  its  separate  form, 
is  thus  found  to  agree  in  these  various  creeds,  yet  placed  in  the 
midst  of  a  low  Arminian  theory  on  the  one  hand,  or  of  the  rigid 
Calvinistic  system  on  the  other,  the  doctrine  has  a  somewhat  dif- 
ferent significance  and  import.  It  stands  in  the  midst  of  different 
relations,  and  becomes  theologically  modified  by  its  bearings  as 
viewed  from  a  new  stand-point.  Thus  Arminianism,  with  its  semi- 
naturalism  and  undue  exaltation  of  human  ability,  diminishes  the 
divine  grace  of  the  act  of  justification,  under  self-complacent  and 
unscriptural  notions  of  working  out  our  own  salvation.  And  in 
the  scheme  of  an  absolute  Predestination,  justification  by  faith,  in- 
stead of  being  central  in  the  economy  of  salvation,  is  forced  into  a 
merely  subordinate  place.  It  does  not  present  the  pivoting  point 
on  which  a  sinner's  free  and  gracious  salvation  really  turns,  or 
where  God's  grace  meeting  human  freedom,  personal  salvation  is 
determined  in  the  issue.  It  is  not,  as  it  is  in  the  Lutheran  theology, 
the  presentation  of  an  open  door,  where  there  is  entrance  provided 
and  offered  to  a  world  of  perishing  men,  redeemed  by  Jesus'  blood  ; 
but  it  is  simply  a  fixed  and  subordinate  divine  act,  carrying  out 
a  particular  divine  decree  of  grace  to  the  individual.  The  decree 
of  predestination  meets  us  at  the  outset,  settling,  at  the  very  begin' 
ning,  the  final  destiny  of  the  elect  person.  From  this  decree  every- 
thing takes  start,  by  it  everything  is  shaped  and  has  its  significance. 
Personal  salvation  stands,  from  the  first,  in  the  pronounced  fiat  of  a 
Sovereign  Will.  The  hidden  decree  has  fixed  everything;  and  the 
incarnation  and  death  of  Christ  for  the  elect  alone,  the  Gospel  call, 
irresistible  grace,  justification  and  sanctification,  come  in  simply  as 
canying  out  the  decisive  decree.*     Hence,  the  Westminster  Confes- 

*  In  confirmation  of  this  statement,  see  Dr.  A.  A.  Hodge,  on  The  Atone- 
ment, p.  389  :  "  The  entire  analogy  and  spirit  of  Calvin's  system  was,  as  a 
whole,  broadly  characterized  by  the  subjection  of  Redemption  to  Election  as  a 
means  to  an  end.  The  able,  learned  and  impartial  F.  Christian  Baur,  in  his 
History  of  the  Atonement  (A.  D.,  1838),  says:  '  Zwingli  and  Calvin  did  in- 
deed adhere  to  the  dogma  of  Satisfaction  in  its  traditional  form ;  but  from  their 


144  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

sion,  with  the  rigorous  logic  that  bends  all  parts  into  the  harmony 
of  the  system,  adds  to  the  part  already  quoted  on  this  subject,  "  God 
did,  from  all  eternity,  decree  to  justify  all  the  elect;  and  Christ  did, 
in  the  fullness  of  time,  die  for  their  sins,  and  rise  again  for  their  jus- 
tification: nevertheless  they  are  not  justified  until  the  Holy  Spirit 
doth,  in  due  time,  actually  apply  Christ  unto  them."  The  offer  of 
the  Gospel,  therefore,  is  not  thus  a  presentation  of  an  open  privilege 
through  justification,  in  which  their  salvation  may  be  decided,  as 
the  point  where  divine  grace  comes  to  human  freedom,  in  a  mys- 
terious but  real  opportunity  whose  issue  determines  the  question  of 
personal  salvation  or  ruin.  It  is  simply  an  included  step  in  the  sin- 
ner's already  settled  way  to  heaven.  For  it  is  to  be  remembered 
that  the  divine  decrees,  in  this  system,  refer  primarily  not  to  any 
gift  of  grace  to  be  offered  to  the  sinner's  acceptance  in  Christ,  but 
to  the  final  destiny  itself  Leaping  over  all  the  intermediate  space, 
they  decide  the  end  itself  In  this,  we  conceive,  the  Gospel  offer  of 
free  justification  loses  its  significance  as  presenting  the  deciding 
point  in  the  matter  of  salvation.  In  the  Scriptural  predestination, 
as  it  appears  to  us  to  be  correctly  taught  by  our  Church — "elect 
according  to  foreknowledge" — "Whom  He  did  foreknow,  He  did 
also  predestinate,"  in  which  the  divine  decree  is  conditioned  in 
foreknowledge,  and  not  foreknowledge  on  the  decree — justification 
by  faith  is  the  point  where  a  redeemed  race  may  come  and  realize 
forgiveness  and  salvation.  But  in  the  Calvinistic  system,  it  presents 
no  such  free  privilege  save  to  the  elect,  and  even  in  their  case  it  is  a 
point  that  decides  nothing.  The  decision  was  fixed  before,  and  this 
is  only  a  stadium  on  the  way.  The  Article  of  justification  is  shorn 
of  its  grand  importance  and  its  decisive  relation.  It  is  no  longer 
the  characterizing  doctrine  of  the  scheme  of  grace. 

But  in  the  doctrine  of  this  Article,  it  is  seen  how  rigorously  and 
fully  our  Church  bears  testimony  against  all  the  heresies  that  have 
appeared  on  this  subject  in  the  history  of  Christianity.  Its  clear 
and  decisive  teaching  cuts  them  all  off  in  the  sharpest  rejection.     It 

point  of  view,  the  Satisfaction  itself  was  subsumed  under  the  idea  of  the  abso- 
lute decree,  in  relation  to  which  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  was  not  the  causa 
vieritoria  of  salvation,  but  only  the  causa  mstrume7italis  carrying  out  the  pur- 
pose of  redemption.'  That  this  is  true,  so  far  as  it  represents  Calvin  subordi- 
nating the  purpose  of  redemption  to  the  purpose  of  election,  every  student  of 
his  Institutes  and  of  his  Consensus  Genevensis  knows." 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH,  1 45 

has  already  appeared  how  the  deadly  errors  of  Rome  have  been  ex- 
cluded. The  Symbol  of  the  Greek  ClntrcJi  gives  no  definition  of  the 
doctrine.*  According  to  Kirpinski,  however,  the  form  of  justifica- 
tion is  made  to  consist  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  a  cliangc  of 
the  heart  to  holiness.  This  constitutes  it,  in  part,  internal  and  transi- 
tive, and  involves  the  very  root  of  all  the  rejected  Romish  errors. 

The  error  of  the  Anabaptists,  who,  in  accordance  with  their  fan- 
atical subjective  system,  made  justification  an  inward  change  to 
purit}',  is  witnessed  against  in  this  Article. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  ScJnvenkfcldian  view,  which  taught  that 
the  righteousness  of  faith  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  something  ex- 
isting without  us  in  Christ,  but  as  really  implanted  with  Christ  in 
our  hearts  and  souls,  through  faith,  so  that  it  dwells  in  us,  and  we 
are  thereby  inwardly  renewed. 

The  teaching  of  Osiander,  who,  starting  with  Luther's  frequent 
statement,  that  faith  becomes  the  medium  of  the  real  indwelling  of 
Christ,  maintained  that  the  righteousness  of  Christ  thus  passes  into 
the  inner  life  of  the  believer,  who  is  thus  justified,  not  by  the  impu- 
tation of  Christ's  righteousness,  but  by  a  real  communication  of  it,  is 
excluded  by  the  doctrine  of  our  Church. 

The  Socinians  rightly  regarded  justification  as  a  legal  transaction, 
and,  as  to  its  objective  character,  maintained  the  Evangelical  view; 
but  by  their  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  a  vicarious  sacrifice,  they 
have  left  no  ground  for  any  pardon  and  justification,  and  this  truth 
becomes  untruth  in  their  system. 

The  Menno7iites\  and  the  QuakersX  both  have  fallen  into  the  com- 
mon error  of  heresy,  placing  justification  in  the  work  wrought 
within  the  believer,  and  confounding  it  with  renewal  and  sanctifica- 
tion.  As  is  well  illustrated  in  the  history  of  these  sects,  nothing 
can  save  any  system  embodying  such  an  error  at  its  very  heart  from 
degenerating  into  multiform   incongruities  and  distortions. 

It  is  thus  apparent  that  every  form  of  false  and  destructive  teach- 
ing on  this  subject  includes  one  or  more  of  the  following  errors:  i. 
Rejection  of  the  vicarious  atonement  and  obedience  of  Christ,  as  in 
Arian  or  Unitarian  theologies,  leaving  no  divine  or  possible  ground 

*  Se6  Winer,  Dartstellung  des  Lehrbegriffs,  p.  95. 
t  Reis,  Conf.  Art.  XXI.  (Winer,  p.  96). 
X  Barclani,  Apol.,  vii.  3,  p.  128. 


146  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

of  justification ;  2.  Pelagian  exaltation  of  human  ability,  and  reli- 
ance on  human  strength  and  works  ;  3.  Denial  of  the  purely  forensic 
character  of  justification;  4.  Making  its  nature  consist  in  an  internal 
change,  according  to  some  modification  of  the  idea  of  an  indwelling 
righteousness,  thus  confounding  it  with  sanctification,  and  shutting 
out  the  penitent  sinner  from  any  hope  of  acceptance,  save  on  the 
ground,  or  in  view  of,  the  holy  life  wrought  within  him. 

Our  Confession,  however,  maintains  the  positive  truths  that  stand 
opposed  to  each  and  all  of  these  errors,  and  insists  on  the  central 
position  and  characterizing  nature  of  justification  by  faith  in  the  gos- 
pel of  salvation.  We  rejoice  in  the  historical  priority  and  pre- 
eminence which  Providence  has  given  our  Church  in  recovering  this 
doctrine,  in  its  purity  and  power,  to  Christendom  from  under  the 
perversions  of  the  Romish  apostasy,  and  setting  it  forth  again  as 
showing  the  open  way  of  salvation  to  a  perishing  world.  We  are 
glad  of  this  great  heritage.  And  we  know  of  no  more  fitting  lan- 
guage with  which  to  conclude  this  discussion  than  the  ringing  words 
of  Luther  in  the  Smalcald  Articles  :  "  Upon  this  Article  depends  all 
that  we  teach  and  do  against  the  pope,  the  devil,  and  the  world." 
"Whatever  may  happen,  though  heaven  and  earth  should  fall,  noth- 
ing in  this  article  can  be  rescinded  or  repealed."     Part  II.,  Art.  I. 


ARTICLE  V. 


THE   OFFICE   OF  THE 
MINISTRY. 

By  c.  a.  hay,  d.  d. 


THE  venerable  Confession  of  our  Church  does  not  profess  to  be 
a  systematically  arranged  body  of  Christian  doctrine;  and  yet 
even  the  casual  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe  that  the  topics,  briefly 
discussed  in  its  successive  Articles,  are  not  taken  up  merely  at  ran- 
dom, but  that  they  seem  to  follow  one  another  in  a  simple,  natural 
order. 

The  Confessors  begin  with  what  naturally  suggests  itself  as  the 
fundamental  article  of  all  religious  belief,  viz.:  The  doctrine  concern- 
ing God,  his  nature,  works,  etc. 

Then  follows  the  article  concerning  Ma)i  in  his  fallen  and  helpless 
condition,  alienated  from  God  by  wicked  works. 

The  third  naturally  follows,  viz.:  The  doctrine  concerning  the 
Mediator  between  God  and  man,  the  Divine  Author  of  reconciliatioji. 

The  fourth  presents  t/ie  sole  condition  of  reconciliation,  Faith  in 
Christ. 

And,  next  in  order,  they  present  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  Min- 
istry, as  the  divinely  appointed  agency  for  bringing  men  into  this  state 
of  reconciliation  witli  God. 

To  some  reflections  upon  the  Article  last  mentioned,  we  respect- 
fully invite  your  attention. 

A  wide  and  tempting  field  here  opens  before  us — the  gospel  min- 
istry!     Theme,  worthy  the  pen  of  an  angel — office,  highest  of  all 

147 


148  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

upon  earth;  with  duties,  prerogatives,  responsibihties,  trials, encour- 
agements, rewards,  all  linking  it  with  the  life  of  its  Divine  Author, 
and  reaching  over  into  eternity. 

We  are  admonished,  at  the  outset,  however,  by  various  consider- 
ations, to  limit  our  remarks  to  but  a  few  of  the  aspects  of  this  great 
theme.  Chief  among  these  considerations  is  the  fact,  that  some  of 
the  topics  casually  alluded  to  in  the  Article  before  us,  are  treated  of 
ex profcsso  in  other  parts  of  the  Confession,  and  courtesy  toward 
those  who  have  preceded,  and  are  to  follow  us,  demands  that  we  do 
not  enlarge  upon  these.  Besides,  the  main  subject  of  the  Article, 
viz.:  TJie  Origin  and  Nature  of  the  Gospel  Ministry,  with  its  Relation 
to  the  Chtirch,  has  of  late  been  attracting  special  attention,  and  it  has 
been  deemed  best,  therefore,  to  confine  the  present  discussions  chiefly 
to  these  aspects  of  the  theme. 

We  present,  in  the  first  place,  a  literal  translation  of  the  Article, 
as  we  have  it  in  the  standard  German  text,  as  follows  : 

"  For  the  attainment  of  tl lis  faith,  God  has  instituted  the  Office  of 
the  Ministry,  has  given  the  Gospel  and  the  Sacraments,  through 
which,  as  tJirougJi  means,  he  gives  tJie  Holy  Spirit,  zvlio  produces  faith, 
zvhere  and  ivhcn  lie  zvill,  in  those  zvho  Jiear  the  Gospel,  ivhich  teaches 
that  we  have  a  merciful  God  through  the  merits  of  Christ,  not  through 
our  oivn  merits,  if  zve  believe  this. 

"  And  the  Anabaptists  and  others  are  cojidemned,  zvho  teach  that  zve 
obtain  the  Holy  Spirit  zvithout  the  external  zvord  of  the  Gospel,  by  our 
ozvn  preparation,  thoughts  and  zvorks!' 

We  append,  also,  the  text  of  the  Article  as  preserved  in  the  orig- 
inal German  of  Melanchthon,  and  in  the  cotemporaneous  Latin 
copy.  The  slight  variation  between  them  in  the  statement  of  the 
main  topic  of  the  A'rticle,  does  not  seriously  affect  the  sense.  Whilst 
the  Latin  intones  the  means  by  which  the  incumbent  of  the  office 
is  to  accomplish  its  design,  the  German  gives  greater  prominence  to 
the  fact  that  the  office  comes  directly  from  God.  No  one  can,  how- 
ever, for  a  moment  suspect,  that  the  Latin  does  not  just  as  clearly 
imply  the  divine  origin  of  the  office,  as  the  German  copy  expresses  it.* 

*The  original  German  copy  presents  the  Article  thus: 

Solchenglauben  zu  erlangen,  hat  Gott  das  predigpatnt  (typographical  error  in 
original,  for  predigamt)  ein gesetzt  Evangelium  utid  Sacramenta geben,  dadurch, 
als  durch  mittel  der  heilig  geist  wirckt,  und  die  Hertzen  trost  und  glauben  gibt,  wo 
und  wenn  er  wil,  inn  denen,  so  das  Evangelium  horen,  welches  lehret,  das  wir, 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 49 

As  in  the  preceding  Article,  the  fundamental  doctrinal  error  of 
Rome  was  effectually  neutralized  by  the  quiet,  unimpassioned  exhi- 
bition of  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  y//5//^V(^/'/6'//  by  Faith  aloiic — so 
in  this  Article,  as  by  a  smooth  stone  from  the  brook,  the  ^^\-3s\.\.  prac- 
tical heresy  of  the  hierarchy  is  smitten  in  the  forehead  by  the  simple 
annunciation  of  tlic  Scriptural  theory  of  the  Holy  Ministry.  And  we 
cannot  but  admire  the  calm  and  quiet  style  in  which  this  thorough 
work  is  done.  There  is  no  denunciation  of  that  monstrous  iniquity, 
the  hierarchical  antichrist,  under  whose  heel  the  church  was  groaning. 
Still  less  is  there  a  phrenzied  rushing  to  the  other  extreme  of  reject- 
ing all  ecclesiastical  order  and  authority.  But,  with  a  spirit  of  pro- 
found submission  to  the  truth,  and  of  sublime  confidence  in  its  power 
to  overthrow  all  error,  there  comes  forth  the  simple  statement,  that 
God  [desiring  to  reconcile  to  himself  the  sinful  race  of  man,  and 
having,  in  pursuance  of  this  gracious  purpose,  carried  forward  the 
wondrous  plan  of  redemption  even  unto  the  sacrifice  of  his  only 
begotten  Son  thereupon]  appointed  and  designated  a  special  agency, 
namely,  the  Ministry  of  Reconciliation,  operating  through  the  Word 
and  the  Sacraments,  zuJiereby  he  woidd  ordijiarily ,  in  all  coming  time, 
apply  to  the  hearts  of  men,  tvith  gracious  ami  sovereign  efficacy,  upon 
the  sole  condition  of  faith  upon  their  part,  all  the  benefits  of  this  atone- 
ment. 

The  Confessors,  in  this  statement,  must  be  understood  as  having 
in  view,  on  the  one  hand,  the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  on  this 
subject,  and,  on  the  other,  the  unscriptural  and  therefore  unwarrant- 
able claims  of  the  papacy  to  all  manner  of  dignities  and  preroga- 
tives  as   connected  with  the    ministerial   office.     The  Article    was 

durch  Christus  verdienst  ein  gnedigen  Gott  haben,  so  wirsolchsglauben.  Und 
warden  verdammet  die  Widderteuffer,  und  andere,  so  leren,  das  wir  ohne  das 
leibliche  wort  des  Evangelii,  den  heiligen  geist  durch  eigene  bereitung  und 
werck  verdienen. 

The  original  Latin  copy  presents  the  Article  thus  : 

Ut  hanc  fideni  consequamur  institutum  est  ministeriiwt  docettdi  evangelii  et 
porrii^endi  sacramcnta.  Nam  per  verbum  et  sacramenta  tanquam  per  instru- 
menta  donatur  Spiritus  Sanctus,  qui  fidem  efficit,  ubi  et  quando  visum  est  Deo, 
in  lis,  qui  audiunt  Evangelium,  scilicet  quod  Deus,  non  propter  nostra  merita 
sed  propter  Christum,  justificet  hos,  qui  credunt  se  propter  Christum  in  gratiam 
recepi. 

Damnant  Anabaptistas  et  alios,  qui  sentiunt  Spiritum  Sanctum  contingere 
sine  verbo  externo  hominibus  per  ipsorum  preparationes  et  opera. 
1 1 


150  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

equivalent  to  a  solemn  protest,  on  the  part  of  the  Confessors,  against 
all  else  as  connected  with  the  Gospel  Ministry,  except  the  simple 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  and  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments. 
These  are  declared  to  be  all  sufficient  under  the  sovereign  sway  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  accomplish  both  the  justification  and  the  sancti- 
fication  of  the  sincere  believer.  Silently,  impliedly,  but  none  the 
less  decidedly,  are  herewith  rebuked  all  claims  on  the  part  of  a  self- 
perpetuating,  hierarchical,  spiritual  judiciary,  that  assumed  to  forgive 
sin  by  virtue  of  official  authority  vested  in  it.  Equally  decided  on 
the  other  hand  is  the  specific  protest  against  that  false  and  fanatical 
spirituality  that  treats  with  neglect  and  contempt  the  outward  Word 
of  God,  whilst  relying  upon  its  own  inward  preparation,  thoughts 
and  works.  To  nothing  else,  say  the  Confessors,  is  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  sinner  with  God  to  be  ascribed,  but  to  the  blood  of  the 
atonement  applied  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  at  his  own  good  pleasure, 
to  the  hearts  of  all  who  truly  believe. 

We  may  well  imagine  how  unwelcome  such  simple  Scriptural 
statements  as  these  must  have  been  to  the  imperious  ecclesiastical 
tyrants  before  whom  they  were  uttered.  This  Article,  thus  reiterat- 
ing the  cardinal  doctrine  asserted  in  the  one  immediately  preceding 
it,  viz.,  of  Justification  by  Faith  alone,  and  at  the  same  time  setting 
forth  the  office  of  the  Ministry  as  existing  only  for  the  purpose  of 
awakening  and  keeping  alive  this  faith,  must  have  been  recognized 
at  once  as  a  wholesale  condemnation  of  everything  in  which  the 
existing  priesthood  chiefly  gloried. 

Nor  did  the  question  as  to  the  origin,  nature,  prerogatives,  etc., 
of  the  ministerial  office  assume  essentially  any  other  shape  during 
the  succeeding  age,  when  the  various  doctrines  of  the  Confession 
were  being  more  fully  developed.  The  issue  still  remained  the  same, 
viz.:  On  the  one  hand  a  simple,  serving  Gospel  Ministry  with  the 
ordinary  means  of  grace  made  effectual  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the 
conversion  and  salvation  of  men,  and  on  the  other  a  domineering, 
hierarchical  caste,  claiming  special  official  prerogatives,  and  practi- 
cally supplanting  the  divinely  appointed  means  of  grace  by  human 
inventions. 

Upon  this  line  the  great  battle  of  the  Reformation  was  fought 
out,  so  far  as  this  issue  is  concerned,  and  this  now  constitutes  one 
of  the  strongest  contrasts  between  Evangelical  and  Papal  Chris- 
tianity, each  party  adhering  to  the  principles  and  practice,  the  lead- 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I51 

ing  features  of  which  are  indicated  in  this  article:  tJic  Luilicran 
Mitiistrv,  simply  the  divinely  appointed  official  agency  for  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments, 
with  faith  as  the  sole  condition  of  justification  before  God;  and  the 
Romish  priesthood,  with  all  its  various  grades,  a  grand,  consolidated, 
self-perpetuating  hierarchy,  claiming  to  hold  in  its  hands  the  keys 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  swaying  an  iron  sceptre  over  the  Church, 
imposing  intolerable  burdens  of  penance  and  bodily  mortification, 
and  demanding  large  pecuniary  contributions  as  conditions  sine  qua 
non  for  procuring  pardon  for  sin  and  reconciliation  with  God. 

So  far,  then,  as  the  attitude  of  the  Confession  towards  the  Papal 
Church  is  concerned,  and,  we  may  add,  towards  the  Episcopal 
Church  also  (in  so  far  as  it  clings  to  the  unscriptural  doctrine  of  a 
graded  ministry,  and  specially  consecrated  ministerial  order,  per- 
petuated in  the  Church  by  an  uninterrupted  personal  and  official 
succession  from  the  apostles) — so  far  as  this  aspect  of  the  question 
is  concerned,  we  leave  it,  with  the  simple  statement  we  have  made, 
as  to  the  unvarying  sameness  of  the  issue,  that  we  may  turn  to  the 
consideration  of  certain  topics  intimately  connected  with  the  theme 
of  this  Article,  that  have  been  for  some  time  past,  and  now  are, 
agitating  large  portions  of  our  Church,  both  in  Europe  and  in  this 
country. 

Only  upon  two  occasions,  during  the  whole  history  of  our  Church, 
has  the  leading  topic  of  this  Article  been  the  subject  of  serious  con- 
troversy within  our  own  communion.  The  first  was  consequent 
upon  the  glorious  revival  of  the  spirit  of  genuine  Lutheranism,  /.  e., 
of  earnest  Evangelical  Christianity,  in  the  days  of  Spener  and 
Francke.  The  letter  of  the  standards  then  remained  intact,  it  is 
true,  but  in  many  respects  their  spirit  had  been  practically  ignored. 
Theoretically  adhering  to  the  principles  of  the  Reformers,  the 
Church  practically  yielded  in  some  measure  to  the  pressure  of  cir- 
cumstances, and,  under  the  undue  influence  of  the  temporal  power, 
encroachments  upon  the  inherent  rights  of  the  laity  were  submitted 
to,  and  even  apologized  for,  that  provoked  a  reactionary  resistance, 
when  the  heart  of  the  Church  was  stirred  and  the  current  set  in 
against  the  lifeless  orthodoxy  of  the  age.  Along  with  other  living 
issues  of  that  day  was  the  question  of  the  common  priesthood  of 
believers,  the  inherent  right  of  the  laity  to  expound  the  Scriptures 
and  administer  the  Sacraments  in  time  of  need,  and  the  ri<jht  and  the 


152  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

duty  of  all  believers  to  take  an  active  part  in  the  selection  and  ap- 
pointment of  the  incumbents  of  the  sacred  office.* 

Somewhat  similar  is  the  origin  of  the  controveryat  present  agita- 
tating  a  portion  of  our  Church  on  this  subject,  and  bidding  fair  to 
attract  still  greater  attention. 

The  great  revival  of  religion  in  our  Churches  upon  the  continent 
of  Europe,  consequent  upon  the  devastating  wars  of  Napoleon  and 
the  enthusiastic  celebration  of  the  ter-centenary  of  the  Reformation, 
in  1 8 17,  led  many,  whose  hearts  were  turned  to  the  Lord,  to  give 
earnest  heed  also  to  the  teachings  of  the  great  theologians  of  our 
Church  ;  and  the  newly-awakened  religious  zeal  and  thirst  for  sound 
and  wholesome  religious  instruction  awakened  in  the  hearts  of  mul- 
titudes of  the  people  a  just  contempt  for  the  heartless  rationalism  of 
those  whom  they  were  compelled  to  receive  as  their  religious  teach- 
ers. Finding  themselves  authorized,  both  by  the  Word  of  God  and 
the  standards  of  the  Church,  to  exercise  the  right  of  choosing  pas- 
tors for  themselves,  and  unable,  in  conscience,  to  submit  to  the  im- 
position of  unworthy  ministers,  they  resisted  the  "powers  that  be," 
and  willingly  endured  the  consequent  persecution  for  the  sake  of 
Christ  and  a  free  Gospel.  The  issue,  thus  created,  led  at  once  to  an 
earnest  discussion  of  the  great  principles  involved  in  it,  calling  forth 
some  admirable  dissertations,  and  provoking,  unfortunately,  a  warm 
and  even  angry  controversy,  in  which  some  of  the  leading  theolo- 
gians of 'Germany  participated.  Meanwhile,  some  of  those  of  whom 
we  have  spoken  as  persecuted  for  conscience  sake,  emigrating  to  this 
country,  found  here  free  scope  for  the  exercise  of  all  their  religious 
rights,  and  one  would  naturally  expect  that,  so  far  as  they  are  con- 
cerned, the  agitation  upon  this  question  would  cease.  And  this 
would  probably  have  been  the  case,  had  they  not  been  harshly 
called  to  account  for  their  opinions  and  practices  in  this  matter  by 
some  of  their  countrymen  of  more  conservative  views.  In  conse- 
quence of  this,  a  controversy  has  arisen  that  has  unfortunately  been 
conducted  in  a  spirit  far  from  creditable  to  either  party. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  account  for  the  vehemence  and  acrimony 
exhibited  in  this  controversy,  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  the  re- 
spective parties  believe  that  they  see   lurking  in  the  statements  of 

*See  some  account  of  this  controversy  between  Spener,  Freylinghausen, 
Frohn,  Eilmar,  Kope  and  others,  in  Walch's  Religious  Streitigkeiten,  I,  562 
sq.,  814  sq.,  II.,  492,  etc. 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 53 

their  opponents  the  embryos  of  dangerous  heresies;  and  so  they 
feel  called  upon,  respectively,  not  merely  to  dispute  one  another's 
avowed  opinions,  but  also  what  seem  to  be  erroneous  tendencies 
likely  to  be  developed  by  them. 

Whilst  we  cannot  but  regret  the  unbecoming  temper  in  which 
this  discussion  has,  especially  of  late,  been  conducted,  we  cannot  re- 
frain from  expressing  our  gratitude  to  the  respective  combatants  for 
the  industry  and  zeal  with  which  they  have  sifted  out  of  the  huge 
mass  of  our  early  Church  literature  and.  placed  within  our  easy 
reach  everything  that  bears  upon  this  question,  each  party  seeking 
to  entrench  itself  behind  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  each  in  fact 
finding  what  it  claims  to  be  a  vindication  of  its  views  in  the  public 
standards  of  the  Church  and  in  the  writings  of  our  soundest  theolo- 
gians.* 

The  parties  in  this  controversy  may  be  characterized  as  the  dem- 
ocratic-republican on  the  one  hand,  and  the  aristocratic-conservative 
upon  the  other.  Of  these,  the  former  represents  the  radical  revolu- 
tionary element  of  the  Reformation  period,  with  its  downright  and 
outspoken  antagonism  to  the  hierarchy  of  the  age;  whilst  the  latter 
exhibits  rather  the  spirit  and  reflects  the  views  of  a  later  era,  when, 
in  a  more  settled  state  of  affairs,  the  opinions  and  practice  of  the 
Church  had  fallen  back  somewhat  from  the  more  pronounced  posi- 
tion of  the  radical  Reformers.  The  former,  starting  out  with  the 
assertion  of  the  right  of  all  believers  to  choose  and  ordain  their  own 
religious  teachers,  were  driven  in  the  heat  of  controversy  to  such 
assertions  concerning  the  constant  actual  right  of  all  Christians  per- 
sonally to  administer  the  functions  of  the  ministerial  office,  as  led 
their  opponents  to  charge  them  with  low  and  agrarian  views  of  the 
sacred  ministry,  that  rob  it  of  all  dignity  and  authority.  The  latter, 
seeming  to  insist  upon  the  self-perpetuating  character  of  the  min- 
istry, are  charged  by  their  opponents  with  a  Rome-ward  tendency, 
as  though  they  made  the  Church  the  child  of  the  Ministry  and  de- 
pendent upon  a  hierarchical  caste. f 

*Our  special  acknowledgments  are  due  to  Doctors  Walther  and  Hofling  for 
many  of  the  extracts  from  our  older  theologians  of  which  we  avail  ourselves  in 
this  article. 

t  Among  those  of  the  former  class,  who  have  taken  part  in  this  controversy, 
we  may  mention  Hofling  (Grundsiitze  evangelisch-lutherischer  Kirchen  verfas- 
sung,   Eriangen,    1853),   Harless   (Kirche  und  Amt  nach  lutherischer  Lehre' 


154  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Now  it  seems  strange  that  among  those  who  claim  to  hold  with 
equal  tenacity  not  only  to  the  Scriptures  but  also  to  the  Confessions 
of  our  Church  there  should  be  such  widely  different  views  upon  a 
subject  so  clearly  stated  in  the  standards  and  so  abundantly  illus- 
trated in  the  writings  of  our  leading  theologians.  Surely  this 
should  teach  these  controversialists  to  regard  with  greater  charity 
their  brethren  in  the  faith,  who  agreeing  with  them  so  cordially  on 
all  the  great  leading  issues  of  the  Reformation  period,  conscien- 
tiously differ  from  them  upon  some  topics  of  far  less  importance 
than  those  here  in  dispute. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  original  documents,  and  endeavor  to  as- 
certain from  them  zvhat  the  Confessors  niidcrstood  to  be  the  Source 
and  the  Prerogatives  of  the  Gospel  Ministry,  and  its  Relation  to  the 
Church  as  a  zvliole. 

In  endeavoring  to  fix  with  precision  the  meaning  they  attached 
to  the  terms  Priesthood,  Office,  Call,  Keys,  etc.,  we  are  unfortunately 
met  at  the  threshold,  with  the  fact  that  the  Reformers  (and,  among 
them  all,  especially  Luther),  employed  these  expressions  often  in  a 
vague  and  variable  sense,  rendering  their  utterances,  at  different 
times,  more  or  less  inconsistent,  thus  affording  an  opportunity  for 
those,  who  differ  from  one  another  in  their  views  upon  this  subject, 
from  both  sides  to  appeal  to  them  for  sanction  and  authority.  Hence 
it  has  resulted  that  the  present  controversy  is  to  a  great  extent  a 
mere  logomachy.  If  these  and  kindred  terms  were  precisely  de- 
fined and  the  respective  parties  would  agree  to  use  them  in  tlie  same 
sense,  more  carefully  noting  the  varying  phases  of  thought  expressed 
by  them  at  different  times,  by  the  same  early  writers,  those  who  now 
so  bitterly  denounce  each  other  would  probably  be  found,  after  all, 
not  to  be  so  very  wide  apart. 

Stuttgart,  1853)  ;  Wallher  (Die  Stimme  unserer  Kirche  in  der  Frage  von  Kirche 
und  Amt,  Erlangen,  1852;  the  same  writer  in  the  Lutheraner  of  i860,  etc.); 
Loy,  in  the  Evangelical  Review,  1861,  1864;  Eirich,  ditto,  i860;  Fink,  ditto, 
1 861  ;  Fritschel,  S.  F.,  in  Brobst's  Theologische  Monatshefte,  1869. 

Of  those  advocating  the  later,  more  conservative  views,  which  have  generally 
prevailed  in  our  Church,  both  in  Europe  and  this  country,  we  call  attention  to 
Lohe  (Aphorismen  ueber  die  neutestamentlichen  Aemter  und  ihr  Verhaeltniss 
zur  Gemeinde,  Erlangen,  1849;  also  Kirche  und  Amt — Neue  Aphorismen, 
Erlangen,  1851):  Grabau,  in  the  Pastoral-briefe  of  the  Buffalo  Synod  and  in 
the  Informatorium ;  Worley,  in  the  Evangehcal  Review,  i860;  Hinterleitner, 
in  Brobst's  Theologische  Monatshefte,  1869;  Mohldenke,  ditto,  1870;  Miinch- 
meyer,  Gueriche,  Thomasius,  Kahnis,  Delitzsch,  Kliefoth,  etc. 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 55 

Fortunately,  on  the  other  hand,  we  are  not  confined  to  the  Con- 
fession itself  in  our  search  after  the  precise  views  of  the  Confessors 
upon  this  subject.  Not  only  are  we  justified,  upon  general  grounds, 
in  appealing  to  the  other  writings  published  by  those  who  are  mainly 
responiiible  for  the  Confession  itself,  in  illustration  of  their  opinions, 
but  these  other  writings  are  directly  referred  to  in  the  standards  as 
rendering  a  fuller  statement  upon  these  subjects  unnecessary. 

At  the  same  time,  we  should  not  forget  to  make  due  allowance 
also,  in  interpreting  the  Aiignstana,  for  the  unmistakable  influence 
of  the  mild  and  gentle,  and  we  may  add  the  conservative  and  con- 
ciliatory, spirit  of  Melanchthon  in  imparting  to  it  an  irenic  character 
that  it  assuredly  would  not  have  borne  had  the  true  master-spirit  of 
the  Reformation  given  it  its  final  shape  and  form.  "  Ich  Jicette  nicht 
so  leise  treten  konnen,"  was  Luther's  characteristic  remark  when  he 
first  read  it,  leaving  us  to  infer  that  he  would  have  planted  his  foot 
down  more  firmly,  in  more  than  one  place,  and  that  we  should  then 
have  had  a  more  radical  and  thoroughly  outspoken  anti-Romish 
document,  as  the  great  standard  Confession  of  Protestantism,  than 
we  now  have. 

I.  The  Gospel  ministry,  say  the  Confessors,  is  a  divinely  appointed 
office.  This  is  so  distinctly  .stated  in  the  Article  itself,  "  God  has 
instituted  the  office  of  the  Ministry",'  that  it  hardly  seems  necessary  to 
look  el-sewhere  in  the  other  writings  of  its  authors,  for  a  confirma- 
tion of  this  statement. 

Now,  whilst  the  office  of  religious  teacher  would  probably  have 
arisen  in  the  Christian  Church  even  without  any  special  divine  ap- 
pointment, as  a  practical  necessity,  just  as  we  find  that  something 
analogous  to  it  has  existed  among  all  heathen  nations,  yet  we  are 
not  left  to  account  for  its  origin  in  the  Church  upon  any  such 
grounds.  As  our  Confessors  here  teach,  it  was  directly  introduced, 
and  ordered  to  be  perpetuated,  by  the  Lord  himself  Matt,  xxviii. 
19,  20,  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  etc.  2  Cor.  v.  18, 
He  hath  given  unto  us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation.  Eph.  iv.  11, 
And  he  gave  some  apostles,  and  some  prophets,  and  some  evangel- 
ists, and  some  pastors  and  teachers.  Jno.  xx.  21,  As  my  Father 
hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you. 

It  may  be  satisfactory,  nevertheless,  to  hear  a  few  of  the  utter- 
ances of  the  Reformers  upon  this  subject,  and  their  echo  in  the 
writings  of  some  of  our  leading  theologians. 


156  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Luther,  in  1522,  Walch.  xix,  1334. 

"Paul  says  to  his  disciple  Titus,  i.  5-7,  For  this  cause  left  I  thee 
in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting 
and  ordain  elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee,  etc.  Who- 
ever believes  that  here  the  Spirit  of  Christ  is  speaking  and  com- 
manding through  Paul,  he  must  acknowledge  that  this  is  a  divine 
appointment  and  arrangement,  that  in  every  city  there  must  be  many 
bishops,  or  at  least  one." 

Luther,  in  the  Smalcald  Articles,  1537. 

"  The  office  of  the  Ministry  is  consequent  upon  the  calling  of  the 
apostles." 

Liitlier,  in   1530,  Walch.  x,  488. 

"  I  hope  indeed  that  believers,  and  those  who  wish  to  be  called 
Christians,  know  very  well  that  tJie  Ministry  has  been  appointed  and 
established  by  God,  not  with  gold  and  silver,  but  with  the  precious 
blood  and  bitter  death  of  his  only  Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

The  term  appointed  {cingcsetzt,  institntum  est),  which  the  Confes- 
sors here  use  in  regard  to  the  Ministry,  is  employed  by  them  also 
in  regard  to  human  government  (Art.  XVI),  and  they  plainly  un- 
derstand the  relation  to  be  the  same  in  both  cases.  That  there  shall 
be  some  form  of  government  among  men,  God  has  determined; 
what  precise  shape  it  shall  assume*  he  has  not  definitely  prescribed. 
That  this  authority,  when  exercising  its  functions  justly  and  right- 
eously, is  to  be  obeyed,  he  has  commanded,  "  Let  every  soul  be  sub- 
ject unto  the  higher  powers.  For  there  is  no  power  but  of  God  : 
the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God,"  Rom.  xiii.  i.  So  also,  in 
the  Church,  with  the  Gospel  Ministry.  "  Obey  them  that  have  the 
rule  over  you,  who  watch  for  your  souls  as  they  that  must  give  an 
account." 

Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  xiii,  1 1. 

"The  Ministry  of  the  Gospel  has  the  command  of  God,  dind  has 
magnificent  promises,  Rom.  i.  16;  Is.  Iv.  ii." 

Melanchthon,  in  the  Apology,  xiv,  12. 

"The  Church  is  commanded  to  appoint  ministers,  which  ought  to 
be  most  gratifying  to  us,  because  we  know  that  God  approves  that 
Ministry  and  is  present  with  it." 

Gerhard,  Loc.  de  Minist.  EccL,  §§  3  &  49. 

"  The  necessity  of  the  ministerial  office  depends  upon  the  divine 
appointment,  for  it  has.  pleased  God  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching 
to  save  them  that  believe,  i  Cor.  i,  21,  etc." 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 57 

"77/^  original  efficient  cause  of  the  Gospel  Ministry  is  the  one  and 
07ily  true  God,  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost,  which  is  proved:  i.  By 
the  express  declarations  of  the  Scriptures,  Ps.  Ixviii.  II  ;  I  Cor.  xii. 
28;  2  Cor.  V.  18.,  God  hath  given  to  us  apostles  and  other  teachers 
of  the  Church,  the  ministry  of  reconcih'ation.  2.  By  the  Hberal 
promises  of  God,  that  he  would  give  pastors  to  his  Church  and 
would  perpetuate  the  office  of  preaching,  Jer.  iii.  15  ;  xxiii.  4.,  And 
I  will  set  up  shepherds  over  them  (cause  to  stand,  appoint)  which 
shall  feed  them,  Joel  ii.  23.  3.  By  the  peculiar  titles  of  God, 
which  prove  that  the  appointment  and  preservation  of  the  ministerial 
office  belongs  to  him.  Matt.  ix.  38.,  etc." 

Cliemuitz,  Exam,  xii,  de  Sacr.  Ord.  p.,  579. 

"That  the  office  of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments  was  instituted 
by  the  Son  of  Gyd  also  in  the  New  Testament  cannot  be  doubted. 
The  Church  has  also  the  comiiiand  to  call  and  appoint  sei'vants,  and 
I.  The  promise  is  added  that  God  will  approve  the  appointment  of 
those  who  are  called  by  the  voice  of  the  Church  and  set  apart  for 
this  office.  Thus  Paul  says.  Acts  xx.  28,  that  those  who  are  called 
mediately  are  appointed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  feed  the  flock  of  God. 
And  in  Eph.  iv.  11,  it  is  written  that  the  Son  of  God  grants  as  his 
gifts  not  only  apostles  but  tAso  pastors  and  teachers,  who  are  called 
mediately.  2.  The  promise  is  added  that  God  will  grant  his  grace 
and  gifts,  so  that  those  who  are  legitimately  called  may,  by  the  use 
of  the  same,  rightly,  faithfully  and  savingly  accomplish  what  is 
designed  by  the  sacred  office;  John  xx.  23  ;  Matt,  xxviii.  20;  i  Tim. 
iv.  14,  etc.  3.  This  promise  also  is  added,  that  God  will  be  with  the 
office,  will  bless  the  planting  and  watering  and  make  them  success- 
ful, will  effectually  work  through  the  office,  calling,  enlightening, 
converting,  granting  repentance,  faith,  regeneration,  reformation, 
and  in  short,  accomplishing  through  the  office  the  entire  work  of 
salvation.  Matt,  xxviii.  20;  John  xx.  23;  Matt.  xvi.  19;  2  Cor.  iii. 
6,  etc." 

As  we  have  already  intimated,  the  Confessors  held  that 

II.  The  chief  design  and  special  duty  of  the  Ministerial  Office  is  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  the 
exercise  of  Church  discipline. 

Whilst  in  the  Article  before  us,  only  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
and  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments  are  mentioned,  the  third 
duty  we  have  here  added  is  throughout   implied,  as  it  is  generally 


158  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

expressly  mentioned,  by  the  Confessors  and  all  the  early  theologians, 
when  describing  the  functions  of  the  Ministerial  Office.  This  will 
abundantly  appear  in  what  follows;  and  we  only  add  here,  to  avoid 
misapprehension,  that  we  are  never  to  understand  the  Confessors 
when  using  the  phrase,  ''forgive  and  retain  sin,"  as  employing  it 
in  a  Romish  sense.  For  it  will  be  recollected  that  the  Reforma- 
tion had  its  very  birth  in  Luther's  thundering  theses  against  the 
blasphemous  presumption  of  that  abomination  of  the  Papacy. 

Augsburg  Confession,  Abuses  Corrected,  vii.,  5. 

"  Our  Churches  hold,  that  the  power  of  the  Keys,  or  the  power  of 
the  bishops  according  to  the  Gospel,  is  the  authorization  or  com- 
mand of  God  to  preach  the  Gospel,  to  forgive  and  retain  sin,  and 
administer  the  Sacraments.  For  with  this  command  Christ  sent 
forth  the  Apostles,  John  xx.  21;  Mark  xvi.  15.  This  poiver  is 
exercised  in  teaching  or  preaching  the  Word,  and  administering  the 
Sacraments,  to  many  or  fezv  according  to  the  call,  because  not  cor- 
poreal but  eternal  things  are  dispensed,  eternal  justice,  the  Holy 
Spirit,  eternal  life ;  and  these  things  could  not  be  done  except  through 
the  ministration  of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments." 

Smalcald  Articles ;  Appendix. 

"  In  our  Apology  we  have  in  general  described  what  is  the  nature 
of  ecclesiastical  authority.  For  the  Gospel  commands  all  who  are 
placed  over  the  Churches  that  they  preach  the  Gospel,  forgive  sins, 
and  administer  the  Sacraments;  and  besides  this  it  gives  to  them 
such  jurisdiction  that  they  are  to  excommunicate  those  who  con- 
tinue in  open  vice,  and  to  release  and  absolve  those  who  wish  to 
reform.  Now  all  must  confess,  even  our  opponents,  that  all  who  are 
set  over  the  Churches,  have  this  command  alike,  whether  they  be 
called  Pastors,  or  Presbyters,  or  Bishops." 

III.  TJie  Ministry  is  no  self-perpetuating  caste  or  order,  with  rights 
and  duties  intrinsically  different  from  those  of  all  other  believers  ;  for 
all  true  believers  are  spiritual  priests  and  are  capable  of  performing  all 
tJie  functions  of  the  ministerial  office,  if  called  thereto,  or,  in  case  of 
special  necessity,  even  zvitJwut  a  regular  call. 

Surely  those  altogether  misunderstand  the  Confessors  who  sup- 
pose that  they  meant  by  this  Article  to  teach  that  God,  when  he 
appointed  the  Ministerial  Office,  gave  to  it  the  Gospel  and  the  Sacra- 
ments and  the  Keys  in  such  a  sense  as  that,  by  possessing  the  sole 
and  exclusive  right  to  administer  the  same,  they  should  constitute  a 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1  59 

superior  rank  in  the  Church,  and  hand  down  these  prerot^atives  to 
their  successors  in  office.  They  not  only  do  not  imply  this,  but  they 
elsewhere  distinctly  assert  the  contrary,  viz.:  That  God  gave  the  Gos- 
pel, and  the  Sacraments,  and  the  power  of  the  Keys  besides,  to  all 
the  Church,  to  the  whole  body  of  believers.  It  would  be  strange, 
indeed,  if  those  just  emerging  from  the  thraldom  of  the  hierarchy, 
and  in  the  very  act  of  protesting  against  its  enormous  assumptions 
in  this  direction,  should  so  stultify  themselves  as  practically  to  give 
back  into  the  hands  of  an  official,  self-perpetuating  caste,  the  very 
weapons  with  which  the  Church  had  so  long  been  held  in  subjec- 
tion! No,  they  held  that  there  is  no  such  difference  between  the 
regularly  called  Ministry  and  the  mass  of  the  believers  that  the 
latter  cannot  perform  any  of  the  functions  of  the  Ministerial  Office 
in  case  of  necessity.  But  this  could  not  be  the  case  if  the  mass  of 
believers  were  not  already  possessed  of  the  essential  qualifications  for 
the  discharge  of  these  official  duties,  and  if  the  right  of  performing 
them,  or  of  having  them  performed,  were  not  originally  vested  in  all 
the  individual  members  of  the  Church. 

Luther,  in  1521,  Walch.  xix.,  1340,  1341. 

"  It  is  enough  that  we  know  that  a  Christian  people  is  not  divided, 
but  is  without  sects  or  respect  of  person,  in  which  there  is  no  lay- 
man, no  clergy,  no  monk,  no  nun,  absolutely  no  difference,  all  mar- 
ried or  unmarried,  as  any  one  may  choose.  There  is  in  reality  no 
difference  between  the  bishops,  elders  and  priests  and  the  laity,  no 
one  being  distinguished  from  other  Christians,  except  that  he  has  an 
office,  which  is  committed  to  him,  to  preach  the  Word  of  God  and  to 
administer  the  Sacraments  ;  just  as  a  mayor  or  judge  is  in  no  wise 
distinguished  from  the  other  citizens,  except  that  the  government  of 
the  city  is  entrusted  to  him.  *  *  The  name  of  bishop  or  priest  is 
not  the  name  of  a  class,  but  of  an  office ;  priest  is  the  same  as  elder, 
and  bishop  the  same  as  overseer.  Yet  wicked  men  have  manufac- 
tured out  of  them  ranks  and  special  dignity." 

Luther,  in  his  Commentary  on  i  Peter  (in  1523).  writes  thus: 

"  Now  these  (Papists)  have  established  an  order, 3.s  though  it  were 
appointed  by  God,  and  have  taken  such  liberties  in  the  very  midst 
of  Christendom  that  there  is  a  greater  difference  than  between  us  and 
the  Turks." 

There  is  a  twofold  scriptural  basis  upon  which  the  Confessors  rest 
these  opinions,  viz.:  The  common  priesthood  of  believers  and  the  power 
of  the  Keys. 


l6o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Luther,  Exposition  of  iioth  Psalm,  in  1539. 

"Do  you  ask,  wherein  consists  the  priesthood  of  believers,  or  what 
are  their  priestly  works  ?  Answer  :  The  very  same  of  which  we 
have  been  speaking,  namely,  teaching,  sacrificing  and  praying.  If 
we  have  become  Christians,  *  *  then  we  have  also  received  the 
right  and'the  power  to  teach  and  confess  the  IVord  that  He  gives  us 
before  all,  cve/y  07ie  according  to  his  calling  and  place.  For,  although 
we  do  not  all  occupy  a  public  office  and  calling,  yet  every  believer 
may  and  should  teach,  instruct,  exhort,  comfort,  rebuke  his  neighbor 
through  the  Word  of  God,  whenever  and  wherever  that  may  be 
needed,  as  a  father  and  mother,  their  children  and  household,  one 
brother,  or  neighbor,  citizen  or  farmer,  the  other. 

That  is  what  Luther  means  by  private  Christians  using  the  office, 
viz.:  Acting  as  priest  in  private  capacity,  not  officiating  in  public. 

Luther,  in  1533,  Winkelmesse,  Walch.  xix.,  1536. 

"  We  do  not  wish  to  be,  or  to  be  called,  made  but  born  priests,  and 
our  prieshood  we  claim  as  hereditary  from  our  father  and  mother; 
for  our  FatJier  is  the  true  Pastor  and  High  Priest,  as  is  written 
in  the  iioth  Psalm:  God  has  sworn  and  will  not  repent.  Thou  art 
a  priest  forever  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek.  And  that  he  has 
verified  in  that  he  offered  himself  for  us  upon  the  cross,  etc.  But 
this  same  Priest  has  a  Bride,  a  priestess,  as  is  written,  John  iii.  29, 
He  that  hath  the  bride  is  the  bridegroom.  Of  this  bridegroom  and 
bride  we  are  born  through  holy  baptism,  and  so  have  become  he- 
reditarily true  priests  in  Christendom,  sanctified  by  his  blood  and 
consecrated  by  his  Holy  Spirit,  as  St.  Peter  calls  us,  i  Peter  ii.  5,  Ye 
are  a  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices;  and  St.  Paul, 
Rom.  xii.  i,  also  calls  us  priests,  for  he  exhorts  us  to  ''present  our 
bodies  as  a  living  sacrifice,  holy,  acceptable  unto  God."  Now  to  sac- 
rifice unto  God  is  the  office  of  the  priest  alone,  as  the  pope  himself 
must  confess,  and  all  the  world  beside.  Moreover,  we  are  not  only 
his  children,  but  also  his  brothers,  as  he  says,  Ps.  xxii.  22,  I  will  de- 
clare thy  name  unto  my  brethren  ;  and  Matt.  xii.  50,  He  that  doeth 
the  will  of  my  Father,  the  same  is  my  mother,  sister,  brother.  So 
that  %ve  are  priests  by  the  double  title  of  childhood  and  brotherhood. 
This  our  connate  and  inherited  priesthood  we  insist  shall  not  be 
taken  from  us,  or  interfered  with  or  eclipsed,  but  held  prominently 
forth,  proclaimed  and  abundantly  honored,  so  that  it  may  shine 
resplendently  as  the  sun,  and  dazzle  the  eyes  of  the  devil  and  his 


THE    OFUCE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  l6l 

abominable  puppets,  so  that  his  sneaking  masses  and  chrism,  in  con- 
trast to  it,  shall  stink  worse  than  devil's-dung.  Hence,  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  New  Testament  has  taken  especial  care  that  the  name 
priest  {Saccrdos)  should  not  be  applied  to  any  apostle  or  to  any  other 
offices,  but  only  to  the  baptized  or  Christians,  as  a  connate,  inherited 
name  through  baptism." 

The  point  is  much  insisted  upon  by  our  earlier  writers,  that  the 
term  priest,  which  in  the  course  of  time  came  to  carry  with  it  so 
much  of  special  prerogative,  was  the  common  appellation  of  all 
believers  in  the  days  of  primitive  Christianity. 

yoh.  Gerhard,  Loc.  de  Min.  Eccl.,  §§  14,  15. 

Augustine  (de  Civit.  Dei,  10)  says:  " Nozu  in  the  Church  only  the 
bishops  and  elders  are  called  priests,  but  all  Christians  were  so 
called  in  view  of  the  mysterious  anointing,  because  they  are  all 
members  of  one  Priest."  "  The  former  signification  (says  Joh.  Ger- 
hard) is  the  ecclesiastical  one,  the  latter  is  the  one  usually  ejuployed 
in  tJic  Scriptures.  This  is  specially  to  be  noted  as  against  the  Papists 
who  seek  to  derive  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  mass  from  the  name 
priest  as  applied  in  the  writings  of  the  Church  Fathers  to  the  office- 
bearers of  the  New  Testament." 

Lnther,  Kirchenpostille,  Walch.,  xii,  1889. 

"They  must  confess  [the  Papists]  that  this  typical  priesthood, 
which  existed  under  the  Old  Testament,  exists  no  longer,  and  we 
ask  them  then,  whence  have  they  authority  to  say  that  they  were 
typified  by  those  priests,  and  that  they  alone  are  priests  of  the  New 
Testament?  There  is  not  a  letter  in  the  whole  New  Testament  in 
which  they  are  called  priests.  What  can  they  say  to  this?  The 
lepers  are  to  go  to  the  priests;  where  are  the  priests?  St.  Peter,  i 
Ep.  ii.  9,  says  that  in  the  New  Testament  there  are  no  special 
priests,  but  that  all  CJiristians  are  priests,  typified  by  those  priests." 

Luther,  Sendschreiben  Prag,  1523,  Walch.,  x,  1834. 

"  For  a  priest,  especially  in  the  New  Testament,  must  be  born, 
not  made ;  is  not  consecrated,  but  created ;  is  not  born,  however,  by 
a  carnal  birth,  but  by  a  spiritual  birth  through  the  Word  and  Spirit, 
in  the  washing  of  regeneration.  So  that  all  Christians  are  together 
priests,  and  all  priests  are  Christians,  and  it  is  a  cursed  abuse  of  lan- 
guage to  say  that  a  priest  is  anything  else  than  a  Christian,  for  that 
is  maintained  in  despite  of  the  Word  of  God,  only  as  a  doctrine  of 
men,  or  as  a  matter  of  tradition,  or  because  many  believe  it.     And 


I  62  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  make  either  of  these  three  reasons  the  basis  of  a  matter  of  faith, 
is  blasphemous  and  abominable." 

MelancJitlion,  in  the  Apology. 

"  Gabriel,  among  other  reasons  for  withholding  the  cup  from  the 
laity,  adds  this  also,  that  there  must  he  adiffcreence  bctzvccn  the  priests 
and  the  laity.  And  I  suppose  that  is  the  principal  reason  why  they 
now  insist  so  much  upon  this,  so  as  to  give  a  greater  air  of  holiness 
to  the  clergy  in  contrast  with  the  laity.  This  is  all  a  human  con- 
trivance; it  is  easy  to  see  what  is  the  drift  of  it." 

Heshusius,  Hauptartikel  christl.  Lehre,  A.  D.  1584,  p.  785. 

"All  believers,  not  only  those  who  are  in  the  holy  office,  but  also 
civil  rulers  and  mechanics,  who  are  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ 
and  regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  these  are  priests  and  priestesses, 
that  are  fully  entitled  to  offer  spiritual  sacrifices.  The  Apostle 
Peter  addresses  not  only  preachers,  bishops  and  pastors,  but  the 
whole  Church  of  God,  those  who  haci  received  the  Word  of  God 
and  faith  in  Christ,  these  he  calls  the  royal  priesthood  ;  therefore 
the  pope  with  his  bishops  does  wrong,  in  that  he  robs  the  Church 
of  God  of  her  title  of  honor,  and  appropriates  this  glorious  name 
entirely  to  himself  and  his  bald-headed  crowd." 

We  have  already  remarked  that  some  of  the  technical  terms  of 
this  controversy  were  used  by  the  Reformers  and  the  early  theolo- 
gians of  our  Church  in  a  vague  and  variable  manner.  This  is  par- 
ticularly true  of  the  term  Keys.  In  its  strict  sense,  of  the  "' potver 
of  binding  and  loosing','  they  all  employ  it,  but  they  often  use  it  also 
in  a  much  wider  sense,  as  will  be  seen  from  a  few  quotations. 

Art.  XXVIII.,  of  the  Confession,  defines  the  keys  to  be: 

"An  authority  and  command  of  God  to  preach  the  Gospel,  to 
forgive  and  retain  sin,  and  to  dispense  the  Sacraments.  This  power 
of  the  keys  we  employ  and  exert  only  by  teaching  and  preaching 
the  Word  of  God  and  by  administering  the  Sacrament  to  many  or 
few  persons,  according  as  our  call  may  be,"  etc. 

MelanchtJion,  Smalcald  Articles,  Appendix. 

"Just  as  the  promise  of  the  Gospel  belongs  immediately  to  the 
whole  Church,  so  also  do  the  keys  belong  immediately  to  the  whole 
Church  ;  since  the  keys  are  nothing  else  than  the  office  through  which 
that  promise  is  imparted  to  every  one  who  desires  it." 

Luther,  in  1521,  commenting  upon  Matt,  xviii.  15-20,  Buchlein 
von  der  Beichte,  Erlangen  Ed.,  27,  363-4,  says : 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 63 

"O  that  this  passage  were  not  in  the  Gospel!  What  a  fine  thing 
that  would  be  for  the  pope  !  For  here  Christ  gives  the  keys  to  the 
whole  Church  and  not  to  St.  Peter.  And  here  belongs  also  the 
same  saying,  Matt.  xvi.  18,  19,  where  he  gives  the  keys  to  Peter  on 
behalf  of  the  whole  Church.  For  in  this  i8th  chapter  the  Lord 
makes  a  gloss  upon  his  own  words,  showing  to  whom  he  had  pre- 
viously (Matt,  xvi.)  given  the  keys,  in  the  person  of  St.  Peter.  They 
are  given  to  all  Christians,  and  not  to  the  person,  St.  Peter." 

Luther,  in  1523,  Sendschr.  Prag.,  Walch.  x,  1846. 

"The  keys  belong  to  the  whole  congregation  of  Christians  and  to 
every  one  that  is  a  member  thereof,  and  this  not  only  so  far  as  the 
possession  of  the  power  is  concerned,  but  also  as  to  its  actual  use 
in  every  way  possible  ;  so  that  we  do  no  violence  to  the  words  of 
Christ,  who  says  bluntly  and  to  all  alike:  Let  him  be  i<nto  thee  as  a 
heathen  man  and  a  publican,  Matt,  xviii.  17.  *  *  Also,  19,  If 
two  of  you  shall  agree  on  earth  ;  also  v.  20,  "  Where  tzvo  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them.'"  Also 
"  Whatsoever  j'^  shall  bmd,"  etc.  And  here  I  would  use  in  proof 
also  that  passage  in  which  Christ  addressed  Peter  alone:  "  To  thee 
will  I  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  In  which  texts  the 
most  perfect  authority  and  the  exercise  of  it  for  binding  and  loosing 
are  assured  and  confirmed  most  positively — unless,  indeed,  we 
would  deny  to  Christ  himself  the  power  and  use  of  the  keys  if  he 
dwelt  with  the  two  or  three." 

Luther,  \n  1539,  Schrift  von  Conciliis  und  Kirchen,  Walch.  xvi, 
2791. 

"  The  keys  are  not  the  pope's  (as  he  falsely  claims)  but  the 
Church's;  that  is,- they  belong  to  the  people  of  Christ,  the  people  of 
God,  or  the  holy  Christian  people,  all  the  wqrld  over,  or  where  there 
are  Christians.  For  they  cannot  all  be  at  Rome,  or  the  whole  world 
would  have  to  be  there,  which  will  not  happen  for  some  time  to 
come.  Just  as  Baptism,  the  Sacrament,  God's  Word,  are  not  the 
pope's,  but  belong  to  the  people  of  Christ,  so  the  keys  are  and  are 
called  claves  ccclesiae,  not  clavcs  papae" 

MelancJithon,  Smalcald  Articles,  Append.,  22  sq. 

"And  here  they  quote  against  us  several  texts,  c.  g..  Matt.  xvi.. 
Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church.  Also, 
To  thee  ivill  L give  the  keys.  Also,  Feed  my  sheep.  And  more  of  the 
same  kind.     But  as  this  whole  matter  has  been  dilisfcntiv^  and  suffi- 


I  64  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ciently  treated  of  by  those  of  our  side,  we  will  not  here  repeat  what 
they  have  written,  but  will  now  briefly  reply  as  to  what  is  the  real 
meaning  of  those  passages.  /;/  all  these  texts  Peter  is  a  representa- 
tive person,  and  speaks  not  for  himself  alone,  but  for  all  the  apostles. 
This  the  passages  clearly  prove,  for  Christ  ahvays  asks  7iot  Peter 
alone,  hut  says:  Whom  do  j'^  say  that  I  am?  And,  although  he 
says  in  one  place  to  Peter  alone :  To  t/iee  will  I  give  the  keys  ;  and 
Whatsoever  t/iou  bindest,  etc. ;  yet  he  says  the  very  same  in  other 
places  to  all  tJie  disciples :  Whatsoever  j/^  shall  bind,  etc..  Matt,  xviii. 
Also  in  John:  Whosesoever  sins  j'e  remit,  etc.  These  words  prove 
that  the  keys  were  given  to  all  alike,  and  that  they  all  alike  were 
sent  forth  to  preach." 

"  But  over  and  above  all  this,  we  are  to  confess  that  the  keys  be- 
long and  have  been  given  not  to  one  man  alone,  but  to  the  whole 
CJiurcJi,  as  this  can  be  clearly  and  satisfactorily  proven.  For  just  as 
as  the  promise  of  the  Gospel  belongs  to  the  ivhole  ChnrcJi,  originally 
and  immediately,  so  also  do  the  keys  belong  to  the  zvhole  Chnrch  imme- 
diately, for  the  keys  are  nothing  else  than  the  office  through  which 
those  promises  are  communicated  to  every  one  who  desires  them; 
it  is  evident,  then,  that  the  Church,  in  effect,  has  the  power  to  ap- 
point her  ministers.  And  Christ,  along  with  these  words  :  What- 
soever ye  shall  bind,  etc.,  clearly  indicates  to  ivhom  he  has  given  the 
keys,  namely,  to  the  whole  Church,  when  he  says:  Wheresoever  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst 
of  them." 

At  this  point  we  meet  one  of  the  principal  topics  now  in  contro- 
versy. In  direct  oppposition  to  this  last  statement  of  Luther,  in  the 
Smalcald  Articles,  that  the  whole  Church,  and  every  member  of  it, 
has  received  the  keys  originally  and  immediately,  the  conservative 
party  assert,  in  the  words  of  Grabau:  (Informatorium,  second  year, 
page  23),  "  The  congregation  [Church]  has  the  keys  not  immediately, 
but  mediately  in  the  Word  of  God,  and  in  the  holy  office  of  the  min- 
istry." 

(First  year,  page  22:)  "If  it  now  be  said  that  this  special  eccle- 
siastical authority  is  given  by  Christ  to  his  Church  upon  earth, 
nothing  more  is  intended  than  that  it  was  instituted  in  the  Gospel, 
and  set  up  in  the  Church  by  ordinary  means  through  the  efficacy 
of  the  Gospel  in  the  form  of  the  office  of  bishop  or  preacher.'' 

"  In  this  house  of  God  now  there  are  the  keys  of  Christ  through 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 65 

means  of  the  Gospel  a/id  the  office  of  the  miiiistry,  not  because  they 
have  their  origin  there,  but  because  that  is  the  appropriate  spiritual 
theatre  where  they  can  exhibit  their  power  for  the  consolation  and 
salvation  of  souls,  and  be  thus  put  to  use.  And  in  this  sense  the 
Smalcald  Articles  say  that  the  keys  are  given  to  the  whole  Church." 

That  our  earlier  theologians  did  not  so  understand  the  Smalcald 
Articles,  but  held  this  to  be  the  Romish  view  of  the  Ministry,  is 
apparent,  e.  g.,  from  Gerhard's  statement :  (Loc.  Theol.  de  Min., 
§  87.) 

"  It  is  a  Jesuitical  evasion  to  say  that  the  Church  has  the  keys 
only  in  so  far  as  they  are  handled  in  her  midst  by  her  ministers. 
Bellanniii  makes  the  objection:  'Peter  received  the  keys  on  behalf 
of  the  Chui'ch,  because  he  received  them  for  the  use  and  profit  of  the 
whole  CJiurcJi,  and  because  he  was  not  only  to  use  them  himself, 
but  also  to  hand  them  down  to  his  successors,  and  impart  them  to 
all  bishops  and  priests.'  Answer  :  We  admit  that  Peter  received 
the  keys  for  the  use  and  profit  of  the  Church,  and  holds  them  in 
common  with  other  bishops  and  pastors,  but  we  deny  that  this  is  to 
be  understood  exclusively,  as  if  the  keys  were  given  to  Peter  and 
the  bishops  alone,  and  not  to  the  whole  Church.  For,  as  Peter  con- 
fessed Christ  on  behalf  of  the  Church,  not  alone  in  the  sense  that 
that  confession  availed  for  the  profit  of  the  whole  Church,  but  also 
because  in  the  confessing  Peter  the  Church  herself  confessed :  thus  also 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  were  given  to  Peter  on  behalf 
of  the  Church,  not  only  because  they  were  given  to  him  for  the 
pj-ofit  and  use  of  the  whole  Church,  but  also  because  the  Church, 
in  the  person  of  Peter,  received  them,  so  that  she  herself  should 
participate  in  the  use  of  the  same,  as  well  in  other  matters  embraced 
under  the  name  of  the  power  of  the  keys  as  also  in  the  election  a)id 
calling  of  well  qualified  ministers  of  the  Word.'' 

In  further  illustration  of  the  above  statement,  we  present  the  fol- 
lowing from  the  celebrated  Evangelical  Harmony  of  Chemnitz, 
Leyser  and  Gerhard.    In  their  exposition  of  Matt.  x\  i.  19,  they  say: 

"  First  of  all  we  are  to  inquire  what  is  to  be  understood  by  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  which  Christ  here  (Matt.  xvi.  19),. 
promises.  Let  us  call  to  mind  the  fact  that  Christ,  in  this  conver- 
sation with  his  disciples,  has  been  comparing  his  Church  to  a  city, 
or  to  a  house  which  he  himself  i.^  building.  And  indeed  the  Church 
is  his  cit}',  in  which  he  gathers  the  citizens  and  subjects  of  his  king- 
12 


I  66  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

dom,  and  his  house  in  which  he  has  deposited  all  his  goods  and 
treasures,  viz.:  The  grace  of  God,  forgiveness  of  sins,  justification, 
salvation,  etc.  The  handing  over  of  the  keys  is  of  old  the  symbol 
of  a  specific,  entrusted,  transferred  authority :  for,  he  who  has  the 
keys  has  access  to  all.  If,  c.  g.,  a  man  gives  to  his  wife  the  keys, 
he  declares  thereby  that  he  acknowledges  her  as  his  associate,  and 
entrusts  her  with  the  care  of  the  household.  So  also  are  the  keys 
entrusted  to  householders  and  stewards  by  their  masters,  whereby 
authority  is  given  to  them  over  chambers,  cellars,  chests,  and  what- 
ever is  contained  therein.  And  so,  when  princes  are  admitted  to  a 
city,  the  keys  of  the  same  are  handed  over  to  them  by  the  citizens, 
in  token  of  their  submission  to  their  authority,  and  in  acknowledg- 
ment of  their  authority  to  admit  any  one  into  the  city,  or  exclude 
him  from  it.  This  figure  our  Lord  here  applies  to  the  Church, 
whose  keys  he  entrusts  to  Peter  and  his  associates  /;/  office,  where- 
by he  teaches  that  he  means  to  appoint  them  as  his  stewards  and 
householders,  that  they  are  to  open  the  treasures  to  the  worthy, 
and  admit  them  to  the  possession  and  use  of  the  same,  but  to  close 
them  up  against  the  unworthy  and  unholy  and  to  exclude  these 
from  the  kingdom  of  God.  i  Cor.  iv.  I.  The  phrase:  '' Keys  of 
the  kingdom  of  Jieaven"  comprises  therefore  that  function,  poiver  and 
plenary  authority  in  virtue  of  wliicli  everything  is  performed  tJiat  is 
necessary  for  the  kingdom  of  Clirist,  or  the  government  of  the  Church. 
And  this  could  not  be  more  appropiately  explained  than  by  this  fig- 
ure of  the  keys. 

''Nevertheless,  the  right  of  evcjy  Christian  to  the  keys,  even  of  the 
most  obscure,  zuhich  he  has  been  entrusted  zuith  by  Christ,  remains  in- 
violate. For,  as  all  the  citizens  of  a  free  city  of  the  empire,  however 
large  their  number  may  be,  have  common  rights  and  equal  freedom, 
so  far  as  the  republic  is  concerned,  and  as,  for  the  sake  of  order,  they 
elect  senators  and  appoint  a  mayor  to  preside  over  them,  to  whom 
they  commit  the  keys  and  statutes  of  the  city,  so  that  he  may  adminis- 
ter the  same  in  the  common  name  of  all,  and  govern  the  republic  ac- 
cordingly, just  so  do  the  people  of  the  city  of  God.  They  have 
indeed  a  communion  of  saints,  and  all  is  theirs,  whether  Paul  or 
Peter,  life  or  death,  the  present  or  the  future,  i  Cor.  iii.  21 ;  they 
possess  all  things  under  the  one  Head,  Christ,  who  has  purchased  by 
the  merits  of  his  blood  everything  necessary  to  salvation  for  his 
Church,  and  in  this  especially  for  every  member,  even  the  most  ob- 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  167 

scure;'and  yet,  for  the  sake  of  order,  they  elect  certain  persons  to 
whom  THEY  COMMIT  the  administration  [or  use]  of  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven;  these  are  those  who  amoncr  us  are  called  dea- 
cons,  pastors,  doctors,  bishops,  or  superintendents,  etc.,  so  that 
everything  may  be  done  among  us  decently  and  in  order,  according 
to  the  teachings  of  St.  Paul,  i  Cor.  xiv." 

IV.  Although  the  Confessors  held  such  clear  and  decided  views 
in  regard  to  the  essential  equality  of  all  believers,  as  over  against 
the  claims  of  a  hierarchical  caste,  yet  tliey  did  not  imderstand  our 
Saviour  as  conferring  Jipon  all  alike  the  right  ordinaiHly  and  publicly 
to  perform  the  functions  of  the  ministerial  office. 

They  declare,  Art.  XIV:  "  No  one  dare  publicly  teach  or  preach, 
or  administer  the  Sacraments,  unless  he  be  rightly  called." 

For  which  Hiitter  assigns  the  following  reasons: 

1.  "On  account  of  the  command  of  God;  Jer.  xxiii.  31,  Heb.  v. 
4,  Rom.  X.  15. 

2.  "  For  the  sake  of  Iv-raimv  (good  order)  and  the  tranquillity  of 
the  Church,  i  Cor.  xiv.  40. 

3.  "For  certainty  of  doctrine;  for,  that  it  may  surely  be  known 
what  this  is,  and  by  whom  it  is  received,  there  is  need  of  doctrinal 
investigation  and  of  testimonies. 

4.  "  On  account  of  the  conscience  of  the  teacher,  that  he  may  be 
certain  that  the  grace  of  Christ  is  with  him,  and  that  his  hearers 
also  may  know  that  they  are  listening  to  an  ambassador  of  God;  2 
Cor.  V.  20." 

Luther  was  charged  by  Emser  with  teaching  that  the  general 
priesthood  made  all  to  be  preachers,  etc.;  to  whom  he  replied  (in 
1 521),  "And  so  you  lie  when  you  say  that  I  have  made  all  laymen 
bishops,  priests  and  ecclesiastics,  so  that  they  may  at  once,  uncalled, 
assume  the  office;  you  do  not  add,  pious  as  you  are,  that  I  also 
wrote:  Only  extreme  necesdiy  can  justify  one  in  doing  that  to  which 
he  has  not  been  regularly  called."  (VValch.,  xvii.,  1597.) 
LutJier,  in  1 5 20,  (Letter  to  Germ.  Nob.  Walch.,  x,  302.) 
"If  we  now  be  all  priests  alike,  then  no  one  is  to  put  himself  for- 
ward and  undertake,  without  our  consent  and  choice,  to  do  that 
which  we  all  have  the  same  authority  to  do.  For  what  is  common 
to  all,  that  no  one  dare  appropriate  to  himself  without  the  common 
consent  and  command.  And  if  it  should  happen  that  some  one  is 
chosen  for  such  an  office,  and  for  his  bad  conduct  is  deposed,  then 


I  68  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

he  becomes  just  what  he  was  before.  For  the  posititon  of  a  priest, 
in  the  Church,  is  just  Hke  that  of  a  civil  officer;  whilst  he  is  in  office 
he  has  precedence;  but  when  he  is  deposed  he  is  a  farmer  or  a 
citizen  just  like  the  rest." 

Lutlicr,  in  1523  (Com.  on  i  Peter): 

"  Now  you  may  say,  if  that  be  true,  that  we  are  all  priests,  and 
are  to  preach,  what  will  be  the  state  of  affairs?  Is  there  to  be  no 
difference  among  the  people?  Are  the  women,  too,  to  be  priests? 
Answer :  Those  who  are  now  called  priests  were  all  laymen,  as  the 
rest,  and  have  only  been  chosen  as  officials  by  the  Church.  The 
difference,  therefore,  is  only  outwardly,  in  virtue  of  the  office,  to 
which  one  has  been  called  by  the  Church ;  but  before  God  there  is 
no  difference.  And  some  are  put  forward  from  the  mass  only  for 
this  reason  that,  in  the  place  of  the  congregation,  they  may  perform 
the  functions  of  the  office  that  belongs  to  all,  not  that  one  may  have 
more  power  than  another.  Therefore  no  one  sJiould  come  forivard 
of  his  own  accord  and  preach  in  the  congregation,  but  one  is  to  be 
called  forth  from  the  mass  and  appointed,  zvho  may  be  deposed  again, 
if  it  be  thought  proper." 

How  these  expressions  of  the  Confession  and  of  Luther  were  sub- 
sequently understood,  is  manifest  from  such  statements  as  the  fol- 
lowing, from  Gerhard  i^oz.  Theol.  de  Sacr.,  §  29,  and  de  Min.Eccl., 

§  67). 

"  So  far  as  Luther  is  concerned,  he  does  not  concede  to  all  that  are 
baptized  the  unconditional  and  absolute  right  to  administer  the  sacra- 
ments, but  he  speaks  of  a  certain  general  ftness  (aptitudine)  which 
Christians  possess  ;  having  been  received  through  baptism  into  the 
covenant  of  God,  they  are  fit  and  suited  for  this  office,  if,  namely, 
they  be  legitimately  called  to  it." 

"  Believers'are  called  kings;  but  it  does  not  therefore  follow  that 
every  believer  can  exercise  the  office  of  the  civil  authority,  without 
a  call  thereto,  for  the  Apostles  speak  of  spiritual  kings;  and  just 
so,  because  believers  are  called  priests,  it  does  not  therefore  follow 
that  every  one  can  without  a  call  assume  an  ecclesiastical  office,  for 
the  Apostles  in  like  manner  speak  of  j/z>//;/^/ priests.  For  they  are 
called  spiritual  priests  not  with  reference  to  an  ecclesiastical  office,  but 
with  reference  to  the  spiritual  sacrifices  which  they  are  to  offer  to 
God.  Nor  has  the  objection  any  force  when  in  it  we  are  told  that 
Peter  adds  that  believers  are  a  royal  priesthood,  that  ye  should  show 


THE    OFFICE    OF   THE    >HNISTRY.  1 69 

forth  the  praises  of  him  wlio  hath  called  you  out  of  darkness  into 
his  marvellous  light ;  for  we  must  distinguish  between  the  general 
command  and  calling,  which  all  Christians  receive,  along  with  their 
consecration  as  believers,  and  the  special  call  through  which  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  office  of  the  Word  and  Sacraments  ///  tJie  public 
assemblies  of  the  Church  is  committed  by  common  consent  to  cer- 
tain persons  well  qualified  for  the  same  ;  but  that  this  call  is  not 
common  to  all  Christians,  is  evident  from  i  Cor.  xii.  29:  Eph.  iv. 
1 1  ;  James  iii.  I ." 

Chemnitz  (Exam.  c.  85,  p.  16S7). 

"Christ  gave  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  Church, 
Matt,  xviii.  18.  And  we  give  ourselves  no  concern  here  about  the 
ridicule  of  those  who  cry  out :  '  Then  cobblers  and  tailors,  cooks 
and  day-laborers,  have  the  power  of  the  keys,  and  thus  you  build 
your  own  Babel  and  introduce  endless  confusion.'  I  answer:  Who 
will  deny  that  in  case  of  need  every  believer  may  baptize,  etc.?  And 
this  case  of  extreme  necessity  the  Church  has  always  made  an  ex- 
ception, as  Jerome  has  testified,  against  the  Luciferians,  and  Augus- 
tine against  Fortunatus.  But,  except  in  case  of  necessity,  this  is 
allowed  to  no  one,  unless  he  be  a  regularly  called  and  appointed 
servant  of  the  Church.  For  this  would  be  to  violate  the  divine  rule : 
How  can  they  preach  except  they  be  sent?  Rom.  x.  15.  Again, 
They  ran  and  I  did  not  send  them." 

Henricus  Barnerus  (Abriss  d.  neuen  Menschen.,  p.  374). 

"That  they  [  /.  c,  Christians]  do  not  all  publicK'  administer  the 
office  of  teaching,  in  publico  ministerio,  is  owing  to  the  fact  that  they 
have  not  been  thereto  called  vocationis  defectus.  Here  we  must  dis- 
tinguish between  rank  and  office,  inter  statujn  et  offieium.  To  the 
office  belongs  a  special  call,  specialis  vocatlo,  which  must  be  com- 
mitted, entrusted.  But  this  is  not  the  case  with  the  rank.  Thus  all 
Christians  are  priests,  but  not  all  are  pastors,  for  this  one  can  only 
be  if,  besides  being  a  Christian  and  a  priest,  he  has  an  office  and 
parish  entrusted  to  him." 

Chemnitz  (Exam.  H.  de  S.,  ord.  c.  i). 

"All  Christians  are  indeed  priests,  i  Peter  ii,  Rev.  I,  for  they  offer 
to  God  spiritual  sacrifices  ;  every  one  has  both  the  right  and  the 
duty  to  teach  the  Word  of  God  in  his  own  house,  Deut.  vi.  i  ;  i 
Cor.  xiv.  But  not  every  Christian  dare  assume  the  public  office  of 
the  Word  and  Sacraments.     For   not   all  are  apostles,  not  all  are 


1  JO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

teachers,  i  Cor.  xii.  but  only  those  who  by  a  special  and  legitimate 
call  are  set  apart  for  this  ofifice  by  God  himself,  Acts  xiii;  Jer.  xxiii ; 
Rom.  x;  and  this  is  done  either  mediately  or  immediately." 

Salamon  Deyling  (Inst.  Prud.  Past.,  p.  403) : 

"  As  the  right  of  teaching  and  of  administering  the  Sacraments 
belongs  originally  (der  Wurzel  nach)  to  the  whole  Church,  but  the 
public  exercise  of  the  same  only  to  its  legitimately  called  servants ; 
so  every  member  of  the  Church,  just  the  same  as  the  whole  coetus 
(congregation)  possesses  the  keys  in  the  same  manner  as  the  au- 
thority to  teach,  but  only  for  private  use,  not  for  public  and  stated 
use,  lest  there  should  arise  confusion  that  would  miserably  rend  the 
Church.  In  the  public  congregation  the  keys  are  to  be  used  only 
by  those  to  whom  the  whole  Church  has  transferred  their  exercise 
and  use  by  a  public  call." 

V.  And  now  the  next  question  that  presents  itself  is:  How  is  this 
office  to  be  filled'^  Where  lies  the  authority  to  select  and  set  apart 
those  who  are  to  perform  its  functions? 

To  this  Liither  answers  (Walch.  x,  2547) : 

"  The  call  to  the  Gospel  Ministry  is  of  two  kinds,  the  one  coming 
directly  froj)i  God,  the  other  throjigli  men  and  yet  also  just  as  tridy 
from  God.  The  first  we  are  not  to  credit  unless  it  be  demonstrated 
by  miracles,  such  as  were  performed  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles. 
Some  were  called  not  by  men,  nor  through  a  man,  but  were  chosen 
by  Jesus  Christ  and  God  the  Father,  such  as  the  prophets  and  all 
the  apostles.  Others  were  chosen  indeed  by  God,  but  through  vien, 
as  the  disciples  of  the  apostles  and  all  who  rightly  enter  the  holy 
office  instead  of  the  apostles  until  the  end  of  the  world." 

But  this  mediate  call  through  men,  by  whom  is  it  to  be  exercised? 
By  the  Ministry  alone,  or  by  the  Church  as  a  whole? 

Calovius  (Syst.  Loc.  Th.,  Tom.  viii,  p.  334): 

"  It  is  known  that  the  right  to  call  has  been  entrusted  to  the 
Church,  just  as  the  keys  and  church  discipline.  Matt,  xviii.  18;  I 
Cor.  iii.  21;  iv.  i;  Rom.  iii.  2;  ix.  4;  i  Cor,  v.,  i  sq.  The  Church, 
however,  has  not  transferred  this  to  the  presbytery  alone,  but  exer- 
cises it  directly  herself  and  by  the  co-operation  of  all  her  constituent 
parts." 

Smalcald  Articles,  67  : 

"  Wheresoev^er  the  Church  is,  there  is  also  the  right  of  adminis- 
tering the  Gospel.     Wherefore  it  is  necessary  for  the  Church  to  re- 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I'Jl 

taiii  the  riglit  of  calling,  electing  and  ordaining  ministers.  And  this 
right  is  a  special  gift  bestowed  upon  the  Church,  of  which  no  human 
authority  can  deprive  her." 

Hollazius  (quoted  in  Schmid's  Dogmatik,  p.  478,  3d  ed.): 

"Through  the  divine  call  is  here  understood  the  appointment  of 
a  certain  and  suitable  person  to  the  ecclesiastical  office,  with  the 
right  to  teach  in  public,  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and  exercise 
ecclesiastical  discipline,  effected  by  God,  either  alone  or  by  inter- 
vention of  a  human  instrumentality." 

Gerhard  {yi\'\,  75,  in  Schmid's  Dgm.,  478): 

*'  The  difference  between  the  mediate  and  immediate  call  consists 
always  and  only  in  this,  that  the  former  is  effected  through  ordinary 
means,  divinely  appointed  for  this  purpose,  but  the  latter  through 
God  himself,  who  manifests  his  will  concerning  the  immediate  call 
of  each  person  either  by  direct  personal  interference  or  through 
some  representative." 

The  mediate  call  is,  therefore,  none  the  less  to  be  considered  di- 
vine:  For  {Gerhard,  xii,  79)  : 

"  I.  It  is  referred  to  God  as  its  author,  Ps.  Ixviii.  ii  ;  Is.  xli.  27  ; 
Jer.  iii.  15  ;  xxiii.  4;    I  Cor.  xii.  28;   Eph.  iv.  II. 

"  2.  It  is  based  upon  apostolic  authority,  Acts  xiv.  23  ;  I  Tim. 
iv.  14  ;  2  Tim.  i.  6  ;  ii.  2  ;  I  Tim.  iii.  2 ;  Rom.  xv.  18  ;  I  Tim.  v.  21  ; 
Acts  XX.  22  ;  Col.  iv.  17. 

"3.  The  mediate  call  inherits  gracious  promises:  I  Tim.  iv.  14, 
16;  2  Cor.  iii.  6;   Eph.  iv.  12." 

Secke7idorf  (Christenstaat,  iii.,  xi.,  §3): 

"  It  is  best  that  we  take  our  stand  upon  the  position  w^hich  Christ 
has  himself  laid  down,  when  he  declared  :  Wheresoever  two  orthree 
(to  say  nothing  of  a  greater  assembly)  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them.  Matt,  xviii.  20;  whence  it 
follows  that  even  such  an  assembly  or  congregation  has  of  itself 
the  power  to  order  and  appoint  everything  needful  for  its  divine  wor- 
ship,  at  which  Christ  has  promised  to  be  present,"  etc. 

Qiienstedt  {T\\fto\.  Did.  Pol.,  p.  1509): 

"  The  originally  efficacious  cause  of  the  ministerial  office  is  God  ; 
the  less  directly  constitutive  source  is  the  Church.  The  authority 
to  select  and  call  the  ministers  of  the  Word  belongs,  by  divine  right, 
not  alone  to  the  priests,  or  the  ecclesiastical  order,  nor  alone  to  the 
civil   authorit}%  nor    alone  to  people  at   large,  but   to    the    whole 


172  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Church  ;  and  without  the  consent  and  voice  of  the  people  there  can 
be  no  legitimate  call." 

Brochmand  (Theol.  Systm.,  ii.,  p.  349): 

"  Our  churches  ascribe  the  right  of  choosing  the  ministers  of  the 
Word  to  the  whole  Church,  and  derive  their  authority  from  Acts 
i.  22,  23.  For,  when  an  apostle  was  to  be  chosen  in  the  place  of 
the  traitor  Judas,  Peter,  it  is  true,  for  the  sake  of  order,  introduced 
and  presided  over  the  transaction,  but  the  whole  Church  elected 
two,  between  whom  the  lot  was  cast.  If  now  the  apostles,  who 
were  extraordinarily  called  by  Christ,  and  were  endowed  with  special 
authority  by  God,  did  not  presume  of  themselves  to  appoint  the 
ministers  of  the  Church,  why  do  the  Papal  bishops,  who  are  not 
worthy  to  be  compared  to  the  Apostles  as  to  their  gifts,  assume 
this  right?" 

Hnlscman  (Vind.  S.  Script.,  p.  1224): 

"The  Church  in  its  totality  {ccclcsia  collectiva),  c-m\  ox6.-^\n  suit- 
able persons  from  among  the  laity  that  they  may  become  clergy- 
men." 

Oiemnitz  (Ded.,  i,  2,  p.  419): 

"The  Church  in  any  place  is  the  whole  body  in  which,  under 
Christ  as  head,  all  the  members  of  that  place  are  comprised. 
Eph.  iv. ;  I  Cor.  i.  Therefore  the  call  belongs  neither  to  the  eccle- 
siastics alone,  nor  to  the  mass  of  ordinary  believers  alone,  for  neither 
without  the  other  is  tJie  ivJwle  ClnircJi ;  but  the  call  belongs,  and  must 
ever  belong,  to  the  whole  Church,  and  with  due  regard  to  order." 

It  is  very  surprising  that  any  who  claim  to  teach  in  accordance 
with  the  Confession  can  maintain  the  right  of  the  Ministry  alone  to 
decide  who  are  to  be  their  successors  in  office! 

Hear  the  following,  for  instance,  from  Lohe  (Aphorismen  ijber 
die  neutestamentlichen  Aemter,  etc.,  1849,  p.  71): 

"  Everywhere  in  the  New  Testament  we  see  that  the  holy  office 
begets  the  Churches,  never  that  the  office  is  merely  a  transfer  of 
congregational  rights  and  plenarj^  powers,  that  the  Churches  confer 
the  office.  T/ie  office  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  Church  like  a  fruitful 
tree  thit  lias  its  seed  in  itself.  As  long  as  the  examination  and  ordi- 
nation remain  in  the  hands  of  the  Presbyterium  (the  pastors),  it  is 
right,  and  can  be  maintained  that  it  completes  itself  and  propagates 
itself  from  person  to  person,  from  generation  to  generation.  Those 
who  hold  it  pass  it  along,  and  he  to  whom  its  incumbents  transfer 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I  73 

it  holds  it  as  from  God.  *  *  The  office  is  a  stream  of  blessing 
that  pours  itself  from  the  apostles  upon  their  disciples,  and  from 
these  onward  into  future  times." 

And  again,  page  86:  "Observe  how  entirely  different  is  the  ap- 
pointment of  deacons  (Acts  vi.)  from  that  oi  pastors !  In  the  case 
of  the  latter  the  congregation  is  not  called  into  consultation ;  it  lies 
entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  appointing  apostles  a?id  evangelists,  who, 
at  their  discretion,  and  as  occasion  may  require,  take  the  advice  of 
the  congregation  or  of  individual  members.  On  the  other  hand,  at 
the  appointment  of  the  diaconate,  the  whole  congregation  is  called 
together,  the  plan  is  laid  before  it — although,  it  is  true,  in  the  form 
of  a  command,  for  the  Apostles  are  the  representatives  of  the  Lord 
— and  it  gives  and  testifies  its  approbation.  And  now,  how  are 
the  deacons  chosen?  According  to  a  standard  of  qualification  laid 
down  by  the  Apostles,  they  are  elected  by  the  congregation,  then 
placed  before  the  apostles  and  ordained  by  them.  We  may  call  the 
Presbyterium  a  sacred  aristocracy  of  the  Church,  whilst  in  the  elec- 
tion of  the  deacons  there  lies  something  democratic. "' 

Precisely  the  opposite  of  this  was  the  special  theme  of  Luther's 
"  Sendschreiben  wie  man  Kirchendiener  wahlen  u.  einsetzen  soil,  an 
den  Rath  u.  Gemeine  der  Stadt  Prag.,  1523,  viz.: 

"  That  Christians,  as  spiritual  priests,  possess  all  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority!' After  enumerating  all  the  priestly  prerogatives  of  believers, 
he  concludes  thus :  "We  see  here,  clearer  than  the  light  of  day 
and  more  surely  than  sure,  whence  we  are  to  take  the  priests  or 
ministers  of  the  Word.  Namely,  we  are  to  choose  tlicm  out  of  the 
multitude  of  Christ's  followers,  and  from  nowhere  else.  For,  as  it 
has  been  sufficiently  demonstrated  that  every  one  has  the  right  to 
serve  in  the  word,  yes,  that  this  has  been  made  the  duty  of  every 
one  when  he  sees  that  no  one  else  is  at  hand,  or  that  those  who  are 
at  hand  are  teaching  falsely,  as  Paul  has  shown,  I  Cor.  xiv.  27  sq., 
*So  that  the  praises  of  him  that  has  called  us  may  be  shown  forth 
by  us  all,'  i  Peter  ii.  9 ;  hoiv  much  more  should  not  then  a  zuhole  con- 
gregation have  the  right  and  be  luider  the  obligaiion  by  means  of  a 
general  election  to  commit  this  office  to  one  or  more  in  their  stead?  " 
(Walch.,  X.,  i86i). 

Nor  are  we  to  be  told  that  this  holds  merely  of  the  special  call  to 
a  particular  congregation,  and  not  to  the  general  call  to  the  office,  for 
Luther  writes,  in  1533  (Walch.,  xix.,  1565): 


174  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"Where  there  is  a  holy  Christian  Church,  there  all  the  sacraments 
must  be  also,  Christ  himself  and  his  Holy  Spirit.  If  we  then  are  a 
holy  Christian  Church,  and  have  those  things  that  are  of  the  greatest 
and  most  essential  importance,  God's  Word,  Christ,  Spirit,  faith, 
prayer,  baptism,  sacrament,  office  of  the  keys,  etc.,  shall  ive  not  also 
have  this  smallest  matter,  namely,  the  power  and  riglit  to  call  some  to 
THE  OFFICE,  who  are  to  minister  to  us  the  Word,  baptism,  etc. 
{zi'hieh  are  already  here),  and  to  serve  us  in  these  matters — what 
kind  of  a  church  would  that  be?" 

And,  at  an  earlier  date,  1520  (in  his  Letter  to  the  German  No- 
bility, Walch.,  xix.,  202): 

"  Accordingly  we  are  all  by  baptism  consecrated  as  priests,  as  St. 
Peter  says  (i  Peter  ii.  9) :  '  Ye  are  a  royal  priesthood  and  a  holy 
nation;'  and  Rev.  v.  10,  'Thou  hast  made  us  unto  our  God  kings 
and  priests.'  For,  if  there  were  not  a  higher  consecration  in  us 
than  the  pope  or  the  bishop  gives,  a  priest  could  never  be  made  by 
the  consecration  of  pope  or  bishop,  though  he  might  say  masses, 
and  preach  and  give  absolution.  Therefore  the  consecration  of  the 
bishop  is  nothing  more  than  if  he  in  the  place  and  on  behalf  of  the 
whole  assembly,  would  take  one  out  of  the  number  of  those,  who 
all  have  the  same  authority,  and  enjoin  it  upon  him  to  exercise  this 
authority  for  the  others.  Just  as  if  ten  brothers,  sons  of  a  king, 
heirs  alike,  would  choose  one  to  manage  the  inheritance  for  them, 
they  would  all  be  kings  and  of  equal  authority,  and  yet  one  would 
be  entrusted  with  the  government.  And,  that  I  may  state  it  more 
clearly,  if  a  Ifttle  company  of  pious.  Christian  laymen  were  taken 
prisoners  and  placed  in  a  desert,  and  had  not  with  them  a  priest 
consecrated  by  a  bishop,  and  would  agree  to  choose  one  of  their 
own  number,  married  or  not,  and  entrust  him  with  the  office  of  bap- 
tizing, administering  the  communion,  absolving  and  preaching,  he 
would  just  as  truly  be  a  priest  as  if  all  the  bishops  and  popes  had 
consecrated  him.  Whence  it  follows  that  in  case  of  need  every  one 
can  baptize  and  give  absolution,  which  could  not  be  the  case  if  we 
were  not  priests." 

The  doctrine  is  stated,  syllogistically,  thus,  by  Gerhard  (Loc. 
Theol.  de  Min.  Eccl.,  §  87): 

"He  who  has  received  from  Christ  himself  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  he  has  the  right  to  call  the  servants  of  the  Church. 
But  these  keys  have  been  given  to  the  whole  Church.     Therefore 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I  75 

the  right  to  call  the  servants  of  the  Church  belongs  to  the  whole 
ChnrcJi.  The  major  premise  is  proved  by  the  definition  of  the 
keys;  for  by  the  keys  we  understand  ecclesiastical  authority,  of 
which  the  right  to  choose  the  servants  of  the  Church  is  a  part. 
The  minor  premise  is  manifest  from  the  words  of  Christ,  Matt.  xv:. 
19,  where  to  Peter,  representing  the  Church,  it  is  said,  '  I  will  give 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'" 

ChcnDiitz  (Exam,  ii,  loc.  13): 

"And  here  the  question  arises,  who  those  are  by  whose  votes 
that  election  and  call  is  to  be  decided,  so  that  it  may  be  regarded 
as  divine,  that  is,  that  God  himself  by  those  means  is  choosing, 
calling  and  sending  forth  laborers  into  his  harvest.  Now  we  find 
certain  and  clear  examples  of  this  in  the  Scriptures.  In  Acts  i. 
15,  when  a  successor  to  Judas  was  to  be  appointed,  Peter  laid  the 
matter  not  before  the  apostles  alone,  but  also  before  the  rest  of  the 
'disciples' — for  so  the  believers  were  then  called — whose  number, 
there  collected  together,  was  one  hundred  and  twenty.  *  *  * 
When  deacons  were  to  be  elected  and  called,  Acts  vi.  2  sq.,  the 
apostles  do  not  assume  the  right  of  choosing,  but  they  call  the  con- 
gregation together,  etc.  According  to  Acts  xiv.  23,  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas ordain  presbyters  in  certain  congregations  to  whom  they  have 
preached  the  Gospel ;  but  they  do  not  assume  for  themselves  alone 
the  authority  to  choose  and  to  call,  but  Luke  uses  here  the  word 
xti()OTovi]ciavTeq,  whicli  in  2  Cor.  viii.  19,  describes  the  election  which  is 
decided  by  the  votes  of  the  congregation,  etc.  *  *  *  jt^  ^-j-jg 
case  of  a  legitimate  call  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  there  were  always 
two  factors  implicated  and  demanded,  the  consent  of  the  congrega- 
tion and  the  judgment  and  confirmation  of  the  presbytery." 

The  Church  does  not  relinquish  (or  dispossess  herself  of)  her 
rights  to  the  universal  priesthood  when  she  appoints  incumbents  of 
the  ministerial  office,  to  perform  its  functions,  in  Christ's  name,  for 
her  .sake.  No  more  than  American  citizens  throw  away  their  in- 
alienable right  of  sovereignty  by  voting  for  an  incumbent  of  the 
Presidential  office.  These  rights  and  powers  are  inherent  in  them, 
in  virtue  of  their  citizenship,  and  are  absolutely  inalienable.  Just  so 
with  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers. 

It  may  be  asked,  however,  does  not  the  Church  practically  exer- 
cise this  right  of  calling  her  servants  when  she  docs  it  througli  those 
already  in  the  holy  office?     Is  there  not  by  common  consent  a  gen- 


176  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

eral  understandings  upon  this  subject,  to  the  effect  that  our  churches, 
by  retaining  the  right  of  giving  the  special  call  to  a  particular  field 
of  labor,  hold  in  their  hands  a  check  upon  the  ministrj^;  as  though 
they  were  thereby  continually  saying  to  those  who  claim  the  right 
of  examining  and  setting  apart  others  to  the  holy  office,  Be  careful 
what  kind  of  men  you  select  and  ordain,  or  we  will  refuse  to  call 
them  to  minister  to  us? 

We  reply:  It  has  always  been  found  to  be  a  dangerous  thing  to 
suffer  power  to  pass  from  the  many  to  the  few.  We  are  neither 
more  nor  less  human  than  those  who  have  gone  before  us.  And  he 
has  read  the  history  of  the  Church  to  little  purpose  who  has  not 
observed  how  insidiously,  almost  imperceptibly,  and  yet  how  surely, 
from  just  such  a  small  beginning  as  that,  ecclesiastical  encroach- 
ments have  advanced,  until,  as  Luther  says:  "They  have  estab- 
lished ati  order  as  though  it  were  appointed  by  God,  and  have  taken 
such  liberties  that  in  the  very  midst  of  Christendom  there  is  a 
greater  difference  than  between  us  and  the  Turks."  Unless  tenden- 
cies toward  centralization  and  monopoly  are  seasonably  checked, 
history  teaches  that  a  revolution  is  needed  to  bring  back  the  power 
and  restore  it  to  its  true  possessors.  The  world  ought  by  this  time 
to  have  learned  the  lesson,  that  it  is  best  to  leave  the  supreme  au- 
thority where  God  intended  it  to  be,  viz. :  in  the  masses  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  to  have  it  peacefully  and  steadily  administered  by  those 
whom  the  masses  select  and  empower  as  their  agents  for  that  pur- 
pose. Such  is  the  true  theory  of  civil  government,  and  such  our 
Church  understands  to  be  the  scriptural  view  of  the  Gospel  Minis- 
try. 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  the  practice  of 
the  Church  has  very  generally  varied  from  her  theory  in  this  matter. 
Baier  (in  Schmid's  Dogmatik,  p.  479),  thus  presents  the  case: 

"  The  Church,  after  it  is  planted,  possesses  the  right  and  the 
power  of  appointing  its  ministers.  For  it  holds  for  itself,  as  the 
bride,  Christ's  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  given  by  the  bride- 
groom, Matt.  xvi.  18;  xviii.  17;  and  thus,  just  as  it  belongs  to  her  to 
open  and  shut  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  so  it  is  hers  also  to  appoint 
the  ministers  through  whom  she  opens  and  shuts.  And  thus,  if  we 
bear  in  mind  that  the  Church  is  a  kind  of  republic,  and  that  the 
ministers  of  the  Word  are,  so  to  speak,  the  magistrates  or  conduc- 
tors of  public  affairs,  upon  whom   the   care  of  the  whole  republic 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I  "7 

rests,  it  is  easily  understood  that  the  power  of  appointing  them  is 
vested,  per  se,  and  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  in  the  zvJiole 
Chiireli,  nor  does  it  belong  to  any  one  part  unless,  by  the  common 
consent  of  all,  it  be  transferred  to  some  one  part." 

And  Hollasiits  (ibidem) : 

"We  must  distinguish  between  the  riglit  of  calling  ministers  and 
the  exercise  of  the  right.  The  right  of  calling  belongs  to  the  whole 
Church,  and  all  its  ranks  and  members.  But  the  exercise  of  the 
rieht  varies  according  to  the  conventional  custom  of  individual 
churches." 

Our  Church  holds,  moreover,  that  not  only  the  call  to  the  Min- 
istry proceeds,  under  God,  from  the  zvhole  Church,  by  virtue  of  the 
universal  priesthood  and  the  power  of  the  keys,  but  also  that  the 
ordination  of  those  thus  summoned  to  her  service,  is  nothing  more 
than  her  official  and  public  recognition  of  such  call. 

Melanchthon,  Smalcald  Articles,  Append.  69,  70) : 

"These  words  ( I  Peter  ii.  9,  '  Ye  are  a  royal  priesthood,')  refer 
particularly  to  the  true  Church,  which,  as  it  alone  holds  the  priest- 
hood, must  also  have  the  power  of  choosing  and  ordaining  the  ser- 
vants of  the  Church.  The  usual  custom  of  the  Church  also  proves 
this  ;  for  anciently  the  people  chose  pastors  and  bishops,  then  the 
bishop  of  the  same  place,  or  living  near  by,  confirmed  the  elected 
bishop  by  the  imposition  of  hands ;  and  in  those  days  ordifiation 
was  nothing  else  than  such  confirmation!' 

Chemnitz  (Loc.  de  Eccl.,  p.  126) : 

"Although  ordination  does  not  constitute  the  call,  yet,  if  any  one 
has  been  rightly  called,  then  that  custom  is  a  declaration  and  a 
public  attestation  that  the  call  that  preceded  it  was  lawful." 

Balduin  (De  Casibus  Consc,  p.  1032-33): 

"Ordination  is  nothing  else  than  the  public  ajid solemn  coiifirma- 
tion  of  a  legitimate  call,  that  all  may  know  that  this  person  has  not 
taken  violent  possession  of  the  ecclesiastical  office,  nor  crept  in 
otherwise,  after  the  manner  of  thieves  and  robbers,  but  has  entered 
by  the  true  door.  *  *  Ordination  is  not  indispensably  and  abso-. 
lutcly  necessary,  *  *  for  it  is  neither  divinely  commanded,  so  that 
it  cannot  be  omitted,  nor  is  its  influe7ice  so  great,  as  is  pretended  by 
the  Papacy,  so  that  it  cannot  be  omitted  without  great  danger;  7ior 
does  the  efficacy  of  the  office  depend  upon  ordination,  as  though  the 
Gospel  could  not  be  savingly  taught  without  it;  but  //  is  an  cede- 


178  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

siastical  custom  which  recommends  the  servant  of  the  Word  and 
admonishes  him  of  certain  duties." 

GcrJiard  (xii,  146) : 

"  We  deny  that  ordination  is  necessary  by  reason  of  any  such 
effects  as  the  Papists  ascribe  to  it,  as  though  by  it  there  were  con- 
veyed any  indehble  character,  or  as  if  it  conferred,  ex  opere  operato, 
gifts  requisite  to  the  ministry,  concerning  which  no  promise  can  be 
adduced  from  the  sayings  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles." 

Gcr/iard  [l^oc.  Theol.  de  Min.,  §  154): 

"As  the  right  of  calling  belongs  to  the  whole  Church,  so  also 
ordination,  which  is  the  publication  and  attestation  of  the.  call,  is 
performed  in  the  name  of  the  Church.  The  Presbytery  performs  the 
act  of  the  laying  on  of  hands,  but  the  Church  unites  with  this  her 
prayers.  Although,  therefore,  for  the  sake  o{  legitimate  good  order, 
it  is  proper  that  the  bishop  at  the  same  time  with  the  Presbytery 
lays  his  hands  upon  the  person  to  be  ordained,  yet  he  acts  here  not 
according  to  his  own  private  will  and  in  virtue  of  plenary  power 
inhering  in  himself,  but  in  the  name,  through  the  right,  by  the  vote, 
under  the  authority,  ivitJi  the  consent,  ivith  the  sanction,  yes,  with  the 
prayers  of  the  zvhole  ChurcJi ;  and  thus  the  ceremony  is  performed 
by  the  bishop,  but  the  act  itself  is  tJie  act  of  the  Church,  as  we  see 
from  Acts  vi.  3;  xiii.  3." 

According  to  this  statement,  which  exhibits  the  true  theory  of 
our  Church  upon  this  subject,  the  Ministry  does  not,  by  virtue  of  its 
official  rank,  etc.,  perpetuate  itself,  but  is  perpetually  receiving  its 
authority  to  examine,  ordain,  etc.,  fresh  from  the  Church,  in  which 
all  ecclesiastical  power  is  deposited. 

In  additition  to  the  calling  and  ordination  of  her  ministers,  the 
Church,  and  indeed  especially  the  ordinary  membership  of  the  Church, 
has  also  the  duty  imposed  upon  it  of  watching  these  her  servants 
and  testing  their  soundness  of  doctrine. 

Augsburg  Confession,  Abuses  Corrected,  Art.  xxviii: 

"  The  people  and  churches  owe  obedience  to  the  bishops,  accord- 
ing to  the  command  of  Christ,  Luke  x.  16,  He  that  heareth  you, 
heareth  me.  But  if  they  appoint  or  establish  anything  contrary  to 
the  Gospel,  we  have  the  command  of  God  in  that  case  not  to  obey 
them.  Matt.  vii.  15,  Beware  of  false  prophets;  and  St.  Paul,  Gal.  i. 
8,  If  we,  or  an  angel  from  heaven,  etc.,  2  Cor.  xiii.  8,  10." 

If  it  be  objected  that  the  laity,  whilst  having  the  right  to  judge  of 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  1 79 

doctrines,  etc.,  originally  vested  in  them,  cannot  now  exercise  that 
right  because  it  is  now  by  common  consent  transferred  to  the  min- 
isterial office  to  be  exercised  through  this  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Church;  we  reply  that  the  Church  has  no  liberty  thus  to  divest  her- 
self of  a  right  which  is  at  the  same  time  a  duty,  imposed  upon  all 
her  members,  not  only  inclusive  of,  but  as  over  against  her  ininister- 
ing  servants.  Ordinary  believers  are  not  only  to  share  with  those 
already  in  the  ministry  in  calling  others  into  the  office,  but  they  are 
to  scrutinize  the  doctrinal  soundness  of  their  teachers,  and  hold  them 
to  the  law  and  testimon}' — to  "  try  the  spirits,"  whether  they  be  or 
God — to  search  the  Scriptures,  to  see  whether  their  teachings  are  in 
accordance  with  the  same,  etc. 

Lttther,  in  1522  (Ag.  Henry  VIII,  Walch.,  xix,  424). 

"To  examine  and  decide  upon  doctrine  belongs  to  anj'  and  every 
Christian,  and  this  so  positively  that  he  is  cursed  who  interferes 
with  it  in  the  slightest  degree.  For  Christ  has  established  this  right 
in  many  incontrovertible  texts :  e.  g..  Beware  of  false  prophets  that 
come  to  you  in  sheep's  clothing.  This  word  he  addresses,  beyond 
a  doubt,  to  the  people,  against  the  teachers,  and  commands  the  peo- 
ple to  beware  of  their  false  doctrines.  But  how  can  they  avoid  them 
unless  they  know  what  they  are  ?  And  how  can  they  know  this 
unless  they  have  power  to  judge?  Now  he  not  only  gives  them 
power  to  judge,  but  he  also  commands  them  to  exercise  it.  So  that 
this  single  passage  would  be  enough  against  all  popes,  fathers,  coun- 
cils, decisions  of  all  schools,  that  have  attributed  the  right  of  judg- 
ing and  deciding  onh-  to  bishops  and  ecclesiastics,  and  ha\-e  god- 
lessly  and  sacrilegiously  stolen  it  away  from  the  people,  that  is  to 
say  the  Church,  the  queen,"  etc. 

Having  thus  endeavored  to  set  forth  the  main  topic  of  our  Article, 
chiefly  in  the  very  words  of  the  standard  authorities,  and  with  special 
reference  to  those  features  of  it  at  present  attracting  public  atten- 
tion, we  beg  leave  to  express,  in  conclusion,  both  our  gratification 
and  regret  in  view  of  the  relation  sustained  by  the  General  Synod 
of  our  Church  in  this  country,  as  we  understand  it,  to  the  Confes- 
sion and  to  the  Scriptures,  with  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
IMinistiy. 

And  .first,  our  gratificatioii,  as  we  observe  how  closely  our 
American  Lutheran  Ciiurch,  of  the  General  Synod,  clings  to  the 
Scriptures  and  to  the  Confession   in   her  views  and  practices  in  re- 


I  So  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

gard  to  this  subject.  Her  official  utterances,  and  the  private  publi 
cations  of  her  most  learned  and  influential  representative  men,  dis- 
tinctly echo,  in  the  main,  the  confessional  statements  that  have  been 
spread  before  you,  and  also  the  spirit  of  the  Confession  upon  other 
features  of  the  office  not  specially  adverted  to,  just  as  these  reflect 
the  teachings  of  the  Word  of  God.  We  have  reason  to  congratu- 
late ourselves  that  those  who,  in  the  providence  of  God,  gave  shape 
to  the  theology  and  life  of  our  Church  in  this  country,  were  princi- 
pally men  trained  under  the  influence  of  an  essentially  orthodox 
Pietism,  and  that  through  them  the  revived  spirituality  of  the  German 
Lutheran  Church  passed  over  into  and  gave  type  to  our  American 
Lutheran  Church  life  within  the  General  Synod.  That  such  was  our 
origin,  accounts  for  the  fact  that,  in  some  respects,  our  church  policy 
approaches  more  nearly  to  the  ideal  of  the  Reformers  and  their  im- 
mediate successors  than  that  which  our  Church  was  compelled,  by 
the  force  of  unfavorable  circumstances,  to  adopt  upon  her  native 
soil.  The  Lutheran  Church  never  had  a  completely  fair  opportunity 
of  putting  into  practice  her  principles  upon  the  subject  of  the  Gos- 
pel Ministry  until  she  found  it  in  these  western  wilds,  absolutely  free 
from  all  state  control  and  enjoying  entire  religious  liberty.  Thus 
disenthralled,  our  Church  rejoiced  in  the  opportunity  of  actualizing 
much  that  she  had  longed  for  in  vain  when  fretting  in  the  shackles 
of  Erastianism.     For  all  of  this  we  feel  devoutly  thankful. 

What  Occasion,  then,  Have  We  for  Regret? 

We  entertain  profound  respect  for  the  piety,  the  learning,  and  the 
wisdom  of  those  who  laid  the  foundations  of  our  Church  in  this 
country,  and  of  those  who,  in  the  same  spirit,  organized  our  General 
Synod.  We  owe  them  a  lasting  debt  of  gratitude  for  what  they  ac- 
complished in  the  line  of  advance  just  indicated.  But  we  cannot  dis- 
miss this  subject  without  modestly  and  reluctantly  expressing  our 
heartfelt  regret,  in  view  of  what  we  have  long  regarded  and  deplored 
as  a  stopping  short  of  what  they  might  and  should  have  accom- 
plished in  this  direction.  We  lament  that  they  were  not  able  entirely 
to  free  themselves  from  inherited  prejudices,  and  to  carry  out,  with 
rigid  consistency,  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  our  Church  upon  the 
subject  of  the  Gospel  Ministry. 

Unfortunately,  in  our  opinion,  several  features  were  engrafted  upon 
our  system  of  ecclesiastical  polity  which  mar  its  s\'mmetry  and  de- 
tract from  its  otherwise  perfectly  scriptural  character. 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    ^HNISTRY.  l8l 

We  refer  particularly  to  three  points,  viz.: 

1.  The  sealing  up  of  the  mouth  of  a  regularly  appointed  delegate 
to  the  legislative  assembly  of  the  Church  if  his  pastor  happen  not 
to  be  present ; 

2.  To  the  exclusion  of  the  entire  mass  of  the  representatives  of  the 
churches  from  all  participation  in  certain  kinds  of  ecclesiastical  busi- 
ness ;  and, 

3.  The  practical  exclusion  of  the  laity  from  all  share  in  the  selec- 
tion and  setting  apart  of  young  men  for  the  ministry. 

We  cannot  but  regard  these  features  of  our  Church  government 
as  violations  of  the  scriptural  rights  of  the  laity  to  a  full  and  equal 
share  in  all  that  pertains  to  the  sound  and  healthful  administration 
of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  our  conviction  that  the  present  agita- 
tions and  discussion  of  the  elementary  principles  of  scriptural  truth 
upon  this  subject  will  lead  to  such  a  readjustment  of  the  relations 
between  our  ministry  and  people,  as  to  bring  about  a  complete  real- 
ization of  the  beautiful  harmony  between  them,  anticipated  by  the 
sagacity  of  the  fathers  in  the  Reformation  period,  but  placed  be}'ond 
their  reach  by  the  circumstances   that  surrounded  them. 

Already,  indeed,  has  the  first  of  these  obnoxious  features  been 
removed  from  the  constitutions  of  some  of  our  Synods,  and  in  these 
the  representatives  of  the  churches  are  now  admitted  to  an  equal 
share  in  that  portion  of  the  ecclesiastical  legislation  that  is  desig- 
nated Synodical.  There  exists  no  longer  that  odious  distinction  be- 
tween clergy  and  laity  which  seemed  to  imply  that  a  layman  would 
not  know  how  to  vote  unless  his  pastor  were  there  to  direct  him  ; 
or,  if  this  were  not  its  purpose,  then  that  cunning  provision  that 
so  effectually  placed  the  reins  of  government  in  the  hands  of  the 
clergy,  by  making  it  absolutely  impossible  that  there  should  ever  be 
a  preponderance  of  lay  votes  in  the  Synod. 

And  as  to  the  second  of  these  obnoxious  features,  the  practice  of 
some  of  our  Synods  has  been  somewhat  modified,  despite  the  spirit 
and  letter  of  the  constitution.  In  some  of  them  the  representatives  of 
the  churches  are  informed,  at  a  certain  stage  of  the  proceedings,  that 
they  need  not  retire,  as  they  formerly  were  requested  to  do,  but  can 
remain,  if  they  choose,  whilst  the  clergy  attend  to  certain  kinds  of 
ministerial  business.  A  move  in  the  right  direction,  certainly  ;  and 
an  indication,  we  hope,  of  something  better.  One  more  step,  and 
13 


I  82  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

that  the  essential  one,  of  giving  the  lay  delegates  an  equal  voice  with 
the  ministry  in  all  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  all  will  be  right. 

Such  a  change  as  that  would  include  the  correction  of  what  ap- 
pears to  us  to  be  the  chief  defect  of  all,  viz.  :  the  practical  exclusion 
of  the  laity  from  all  share  in  the  selection  and  setting  apart  of  young 
men  for  the  ministry.  Some  ten  years  ago  our  feeble  voice  was 
raised  in  behalf  of  a  reform  in  this  matter,  advocating  "  the  right  and 
the  duty  of  the  whole  Church,  through  her  representatives,  clerical  and 
lay,  to  take  an  active  part  in  the  discussion  and  decision  of  all  questions 
affecting  her  welfare,  and,  among  others,  especially  also  in  the  great 
question  as  to  who  shall  constitute  her  Ministry."  According 
to  our  present  Synodical  constitution  the  laity  are  not  allowed  to 
take  any  part  whatever  in  deciding  this  question.  It  is  solely  a 
prerogative  of  the  clergy.  And  apologize  for  this  feature  of  our 
Church  polity  as  we  may,  it  in  effect  amounts  to  constituting  the 
clergy  a  self-perpetuating  class,  just  the  very  abuse  against  which 
the  Reformers  so  vehemently  protested.  Allow  us  simply  to  men- 
tion the  grounds  upon  which  our  plea  was  based,  whilst  we  refer 
those  who  may  feel  a  special  interest  in  the  question  to  our  Article 
in  the  forty-seventh  number  of  the  Evangelical  Reviezv  for  the  argu- 
ment in  detail. 

The  points  are,  that  by  such  reform  we  would, 

"  I.  Bring  back  the  Church  in  this  particular  into  conformity  with 
primitive  Christian  usage. 

2.  That  we  would  practically  and  fully  illustrate  one  of  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  the  Reformation,  which  in  this  feature  of  our 
Church  government  is  strangely  ignored  ; 

3.  That  we  would  hereby  accord  with  our  brethren  of  several 
other  branches  of  the  Protestant  Church  in  acknowledging  the  true 
position  of  the  laity  in  the  regulation  of  ecclesiastical  affairs ; 

4.  That  we  would  thereby  avoid  much  unnecessary  offence  ; 

5.  That  we  would  furnish  an  additional  guarantee  for  the  preser- 
vation of  sound  doctrine  and  pure  morals  in  the  Church;  and, 

6.  That  we  would  secure  a  more  cordial  interest  in  the  Church 
on  the  part  of  the  laity,  and  stimulate  their  zeal  in  laboring  for  her 
welfare." 

On  all  these  points  our  convictions  have  only  deepened  with  time, 
and  we  cannot  conceal  the  gratification  it  has  afforded  us  to  find  that 
the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Theological  Seminary  of  the  General 


THE    OFFICE    OF    THE    MINISTRY.  I  S3 

Sj'iiod,  in  selecting  a  person  to  prepare  the  Holman  Lecture  upon 
the  Fifth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  saw  fit  to  fix  their 
choice  upon  one  who  had  so  frankly  and  earnestly  been  pleading  for 
a  readjustment  of  the  relations  of  the  clergy  and  laity  in  our  ecclesi- 
astical jurisprudence.  It  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that  this  choice 
was  made  at  random.  If  it  was  done  with  any  reference  to  the  fact 
that  we  have  adverted  to,  it  may  be  hailed  as  an  indication  of  pro- 
gress in  what  we  feel  assured  to  be  the  right  direction.  If  it  was 
not  done  with  any  such  design,  it  has  at  least  afforded  a  favorable 
opportunity  for  the  utterance,  on  the  part  of  a  true  child  of  the 
Church,  of  long-cherished  and  ever-deepening  convictions  on  a  sub- 
ject of  momentous  importance. 


ARTICLE  VI. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE. 

By  C.  a.  stork,  D.  D. 


IT  is  not  necessary,  in  order  to  vindicate  the  excellence  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  as  a  standard  of  Christian  faith,  that  it 
should  be  shown  to  be  a  symmetrical  system  of  doctrine.  Enthu- 
siasts have  professed  to  find  in  it  such  a  system.  But  the  attempts 
to  make  this  symmetry  apparent  have  not  persuaded  the  unbiased 
that  it  has  any  existence,  outside  the  minds  of  indiscreet  admirers. 
The  Confession  was  not  shaped  under  such  circumstances,  nor  by 
such  aims,  as  must  conspire  in  order  to  elaborate  completeness. 
Systems  of  speculative  truth  come  to  perfection,  as  the  particles  of 
matter  organize  into  the  flawless  crystal,  in  a  state  of  absolute 
quiescence.  But  the  history  of  the  Confession  is  the  history  of  the 
resolution  of  two  antagonistic  forces.  The  Confession,  as  has  been 
well  said,  was  properly  an  apology.  It  represented  the  compro- 
mise— perhaps  an  unconscious  compromise,  yet  still  a  compromise 
— made  by  those  who  stood  between  two  mighty  forces ;  on  the  one 
hand,  the  attracting  power  of  the  Romish  Church,  combining  in 
itself  all  the  subtle  force  of  association,  habit,  traditionary  reverence, 
and  desire  for  peace,  and,  on  the  other,  the  repelling  power  of  truth, 
simple  and  absolute,  working  through  minds  enlightened  and  con- 
strained by  the  word  of  God.  They  who  framed  it  had  no  mind  to 
draw  out  a  perfect  scheme  of  Christian  doctrine.  They  had  in  view 
a  practical  purpose.  That  purpose  involved  the  harmony  of  two 
conflicting  aims,  viz:  to  bring  into  strong  relief  the  cardinal  truths 
of  the  Catholic  faith,  in  which  they  were  cordially  at  one  with  the 
Romish  Church,  and  yet  to  emphasize  the  specially  evangelical 
184 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I  85 

doctrines,  wherein  they  felt  themselves  compelled  to  bear  testimony 
to  the  unadulterated  gospel  of  Christ,  as  against  vital  errors  in  that 
Church.  These  two  points  were  to  be  kept  in  view,  as  the  land- 
marks of  the  course  down  which  they  had  to  steer  their  difficult 
way. 

The  shaping  of  such  a  scheme  of  doctrine  would  natural!}'  enough 
result  in  an}-thing  but  a  symmetrical  standard  of  fiith.  It  was  an 
attempt  to  do  that  in  the  sphere  of  theology,  which  has  been  realized 
in  the  sphere  of  political  science,  in  the  growth  of  that  anomalous 
but  very  useful  thing,  the  English  Constitution.  Take  away  the 
history  of  the  struggle  that  preceded  and  attended  the  formation 
of  the  Confession,  and  the  first  feature  in  it  that  will  strike  a  candid 
mind,  is  its  lack  of  symmetry.  Read  it  in  the  light  of  the  aims  and 
hopes  of  its  framers,  and  it  is  at  once  seen  to  be  a  work  of  match- 
less skill.  As  a  purely  logical  statement  of  Christian  doctrine,  it  is 
crude  in  form.  As  a  practical  testimony  to  the  essential  truths  of 
the  gospel,  as  over  against  the  errors  and  perversions  of  Rome,  it  is 
a  perfect  organization.  Read  in  this  light,  its  abrupt  transitions,  as 
in  the  passage  from  the  Article  on  Justification  to  that  on  the  Min- 
istry, are  master-strokes  of  strategy ;  its  redundancies,  as  in  the  case 
of  Articles  VI.  and  XX.,  are  the  necessary  defences  of  the  Reformed 
position.  It  is  in  this  light  continually  that  the  connection  of  the 
several  Articles,  and  the  force  of  each  separate  Article,  must  be  esti- 
mated. 

There  is,  for  instance,  no  logical  connection,  viewed  purely  in  the 
light  of  theological  science,  between  the  Article  on  "  The  Minis- 
terial Office"  and  that  on  "  New  Obedience."  But  when  we  remem- 
ber, that  one  of  the  strong  fortresses  of  the  Papal  Church  was  the 
asserted  power  of  the  clergy  to  open  and  to  shut  the  gate  of  heaven 
to  men,  and  that  linked  to  it  in  strategic  order,  stood  that  other 
dogmatic  fortress  of  the  fiction  of  the  saints'  merits  vested  in  the 
clergy,  with  full  powers  to  bestow  on  others  as  part  of  the  purchase 
of  salvation,  then  the  connection  of  the  Article  that  strips  the  min- 
istry of  all  powers  of  salvation,  with  that  which  relegates  "good 
works"  to  their  true  position,  as  fruits  of  faith  and  not  the  price  of 
salvation,  is  evident  enough. 

In  this  light  of  histor}',  we  shall  attempt  to  open  the  meaning  of 
this  Sixth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  "  concerning  New 
Obedience." 


lS6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  Article  reads  as  follows  :* 

"They  likewise  teach,  that  this  faith  must  bring  forth  good  fruits; 
and  that  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works,  which  God  has 
commanded,  because  it  is  his  will,  and  not  in  the  expectation  of 
thereby  meriting  justification  before  him.  For,  remission  of  sins 
and  justification  are  secured  by  faith;  as  the  declaration  of  Christ 
testifies:  'When  ye  shall  have  done  all  these  things,  say,  we  are 
unprofitable  servants.' 

"  The  same  thing  is  taught  by  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  writers  : 
for  Ambrose  says,  '  This  has  been  ordained  by  God,  that  he  who 
believes  in  Christ  shall  be  saved  without  works,  receiving  remission 
of  sins  gratuitously  through  faith  alone.' "f 

The  doctrine  of  the  Article  is  that  of  the  vital  connection  of  faith 
and  holiness  of  life :  it  is  a  reaffirmation  of  that  irrefragable  chain 
which  the  apostle  James  forged  out  in  his  declaration  that  "  faith 
without  works  is  dead."  In  its  connection,  as  part  of  the  Confes- 
sion, it  grows  logically  out  of  Article  IV.  on  Justification.  In  that 
Article  was  affirmed  the  Pauline  doctrine,  that  the  sinner  is  made 
just  before  God,  and  acknowledged  as  his  child  freely  through  faith, 

*The  Translation  of  the  Article  given  above  is  that  of  the  "  Book  of  Wor- 
ship" as  rendered  from  the  Latin,  a  copy  of  which  is  subjoined  from  Miiller's 
Edition  of  the  Symbolical  Books,  i860. 

Art.  VI.     De  Nova  Obedientia. 

Item  decent,  quod  fides  ilia  debeat  bonos  fritctus  parere,  et  quod  oporteat 
bona  opera  man  data  a  Deo  facere  propter  voluntatem  Dei,  non  ut  confidamus 
per  ea  opera  justificationem  coram  Deo  mereri.  Nam  remissio  peccatorum  et 
justificatio  fide  apprehenditur,  sicut  testatur  et  vox  Christi :  Quum  feceriiis 
kax  ojitnia,  dicitc,  scrvi  inutUes  stimus.  Idem  docent  et  veteres  scriptores  ec- 
clesiastici.  Ambrosius  enim  inquit :  Hoc  constitutum  est  a  Deo,  ut  qui  credit  in 
Christum,  salvus  sit,  sine  opere,  sola  fide,  gratis  accipiens  remissionem  pecca- 
torum. 

fWe  may  remark  briefly,  that  the  authority  quoted,  by  the  authors  of  the 
Confession,  from  the  Fathers,  is  unhappily  invalidated  by  a  mistake.  "The 
ancient  ecclesiastical  writers"  give  abundant  testimony  to  substantiate  the  doc- 
trine emphasized  in  this  part  of  the  Article  (see  the  citation  in  Chemnitz, 
Ouenstedt,  Gerhard  in  loc,  et  passim);  but  Ambrose  is  not  the  author  of  the 
passage  ascribed  to  him.  It  is  found  in  a  commentary  on  the  Pauline  Epistles 
attributed  to  Ambrose,  but  which  a  more  careful  criticism  has  decided  not  to 
be  the  work  of  this  Father.  Others  have  attributed  it  to  the  deacon  Hilary. 
Its  origin,  though  certainly  patristic,  is  left,  as  to  its  particular  sources,  wholly 
in  doubt.     See  VValch :  Introductio  in  Litres  Symboticos,  pp.  276-279. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I  8/ 

without  reference  either  to  his  outward  works  or  to  his  inward  affec- 
tions. On  this,  after  the  somewhat  illogical  interpolation  of  Article 
v.,  on  the  "  Ministerial  Office,"  followed  in  most  natural  sequence 
the  necessary  complement  and  completion  of  the  doctrine  of  faith, 
that  it  must  be  a  living  faith  working  by  love  and  bringing  forth 
the  fruits  of  the  Spirit.  "They  likewise  teach  that  this  faith  must 
bring  forth  good  fruits."  That  sentence  contains  the  logical  kernel 
of  the  whole  Article;  the  rest  is  but  the  expansion  and  adjustment 
of  the  central  thought. 

We  will  examine  first  this  central  truth,  and  then  the  qualifica- 
tions by  which  it  is  defined  and  guarded.  This  order  of  discussion 
involves  the  consideration  of  the  following  points : 

1.  The  Necessity  of  the  New  Obedience. 

2.  The  Nature  and  Limitations  of  it. 

3.  The  Grounds  of  its  Obligation. 

First,  then,  in  order  of  importance  we  have  to  consider 

I.  The  Necessity  of  the  New  Obedience. 

The  really  salient  feature  of  this  Article  is  the  stress  laid  on  the 
necessity  of  "  good  works."  "  This  faith  vnist  bring  forth  good 
fruits;"  "it  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works  which  God  has 
commanded."  This  affirms  the  necessity  of  right  living  It  affirms, 
too,  the  necessity  of  right  living  as  an  essential  constituent  or  out- 
flow of  true  religion.  It  makes  holiness  of  life,  conformity  to  the 
law  of  rectitude,  to  be  bound  up  in  the  .same  necessity  with  the  ex- 
ercise of  faith.  It  puts  the  obligation  to  good  works  into  the  same 
category  with  the  obligation  to  worship  and  to  trust  in  God.  It 
unites  what  the  common  tendency  of  the  religions  of  the  world  has 
almost  uniformly  separated,  the  religious  sentiment,  and  the  moral 
sense.  The  two  may  be,  and  are  to  be,  distinguished,  but  not  dis- 
severed. We  are  under  an  obligation,  felt  by  the  rudest  savage,  to 
adore  God.  We  are  moved  by  a  like  potent  sense  of  obligation  to 
obey  the  law  of  right  in  the  practice  of  life.  But  whilst  neither  is 
ever  wholly  extinguished,  yet  in  the  experience  of  the  race  there 
comes  continually  into  view  a  rift  between  the  two,  tending  ever  to 
wider  and  wider  division.  In  the  pagan  religions  this  is  very 
marked.  The  code  of  religion  there  is  one  thing  ;  the  code  of  morals 
is  altogether  another.  In  the  grosser  forms  of  paganism  the\'  be- 
come directly  antagonistic,  as  where  the  religious  sentiment  of  the 


1 88  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Hindoo  mother  moves  her  to  kill  her  child  ;  as  in  the  worship  of 
the  Grecian  Aphrodite  in  Asia  Minor,  where  a  part  of  the  cultus 
was  the  practice  of  unchastity.  But  as  religion  becomes  purified  by 
right  reason,  this  chasm  is  made  narrower,  until  in  the  revelation  of 
truth  given  in  Christianity,  the  separation  is  wholly  lost,  and  the 
connection  between  religion  and  good  morals,  between  faith  and 
works,  is  made  so  close  that  they  are  bound  up  with  the  same  cord 
of  obligation.  They  are  enclosed  in  the  same  necessity,  and  en- 
forced by  the  same  sanction  of  conscience  and  command.  At  last 
the  religious  sentiment  and  the  moral  sense  merge  wholly  into  each 
other,  and  become  one  in  that  peculiarly  spiritual  quality  of  the 
soul,  for  which  pagan  languages,  indeed,  furnish  no  adequate  term, 
but  which  we  know  by  the  name  of  holiness^-  In  that  are  blended 
and  lost  in  one,  the  aspiration  of  the  soul  to  the  personal  God,  and 
the  imperative  of  the  conscience  impelling  to  the  right.  It  was  to 
express  this  organic  union,  this  vital  integration  of  faith  with  good 
works,  that  this  article  was  shaped. 

I  have  said  that  this  doctrine  of  the  necessary  union  of  holiness  in 
practice  with  faith,  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  Christianity,  and 
intimated  that  all  false  religions  have  failed  in  securing  the  connec- 
tion. They  have  so  failed  practically,  and,  for  the  most  part,  even 
in  idea.  But  yet  this  necessity  of  right  living,  as  one  of  the  vital 
organs  of  true  religion,  was  not  wholly  unperceived  even  by  the 
pagan  world.  The  best  minds  of  Greece  and  Rome  felt,  and  more 
or  less  clearly  taught,  that  there  could  be  no  true  worship  of  God 
without  the  practice  of  goodness  in  the  life.  The  whole  scope  of 
that  most  wonderful  passage  in  all  heathen  literature,  the  Apology 
of  Socrates,  is  to  this  effect  :  "  If  you  release  me,  O  Athenians,"  says 
Socrates,  in  substance,  "  I  shall  only  go  back  to  tell  the  young  men 
that  there  is  nothing  better  than  to  cultivate  justice  and  temperance 
and  knowledge  in  the  soul."  It  is  the  final  protest  of  the  martyr- 
spirit  against  the  divorce  between  religion  and  right-living,  that  was 
attempted  to  be  made  by  the  Sophists  in  Athens ;  an  attempt  that  was 
only  too  effectually  realized,  in  later  times,  by  the  Romish  Church. 

In  the  Second  Alcibiadesf  there  is  a  discussion  between  Alcibi- 

*See  De  Quincey  in  frequent  allusions  to  the  poverty  of  the  Greek  language, 
though  so  rich  in  all  other  vocabularies,  in  terms  expressive  of  the  spiritual 
ideas  of  the  Hebrew  and  Christian  faith. 

fad  Alcib.,  149,  E.  150, 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I  89 

ades  and  Socrates  concerning  the  efficacy  of  prayer  ;  and  the  con- 
clusion is  reached  that  no  rehgious  service,  whether  of  pi-ayer  or 
sacrifice,  is  acceptable  to  God  that  is  offered  by  a  corrupt  man.  "It 
■would  be  a  dreadful  tiling,"  says  Socrates,  "if  the  gods  looked  to 
gifts  and  sacrifices,  and  not  to  the  soul,  if  a  person  be  holy  and  just. 
Justice  and  self  control,  it  seems  then,  are  honored  above  all  things 
by  the  gods  :"  which  sounds  very  much  like  the  answer  made  by 
Samuel  to  Saul  when  he  rebuked  his  sin  of  disobedience,  "  Behold, 
to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken  than  the  fat  of  rams." 

Indeed,  as  soon  as  the  mind  of  man  begins  to  right  itself,  after  the 
perturbations  of  the  great  storm  of  sin  in  the  heart,  and  to  take  its 
bearings,  it  settles  inevitably  to  the  conviction  that  any  true  service 
or  worship  must  go  forth  into  obedience.  Epictetus  and  Socrates, 
in  their  stammering  and  incoherent  way,  join  their  voices  with  that 
of  the  apostle  James,  saying,  "  Faith  without  works  is  dead."  "  Be 
assured,"  says  Epictetus.  "  that  the  essence  of  piety  toward  God  lies 
in  this,  to  form  right  opinions  concerning  him,  as  existing,  and  as 
governing  the  universe  justly  and  well.  Fix  yourself  in  this  reso- 
lution to  obey  him,  and  yield  to  him,  and  willingly  follow  him 
amidst  all  events.  When  you  have  recourse  to  divination  *  *  attend 
to  the  great  diviner,  the  Pythian  God,  who  once  cast  out  of  the 
temple  him  who  neglected  to  save  his  friend."*  So,  according  to 
the  great  Stoic  moralist,  to  pray  in  the  temple  is  of  no  avail,  if  one 
neglect  to  do  his  duty  out  of  doors.  This  is  only  the  concrete  form 
of  the  abstract  statement  of  our  Article  :  "  This  faith  must  bring  forth 
good  fruits  "^  *  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works  which 
God  has  conmianded." 

With  this  writing  of  God  in  the  natural  conscience  and  heart,  the 
revelation  of  God  in  his  word  is  in  full  accord.  If  any  one  aim  is 
clear  in  all  God's  revealed  plan,  as  the  final  end  to  be  secured  by 
the  work  of  redemption,  it  is  that  men  may  be  brought  to  the  prac- 
tice and  enjoyment  of  holiness.  If  faith  is  a  pre-eminent  grace,  it  is 
so  because  it  alone  can  open  the  way  through  Christ  into  the  actual 
possession  of  this  holiness.  It  is  blessed,  mainly,  because  it  leads 
to  that  which  is  still  more  blessed.  "Now  abideth  faith,  hope, 
charity,  these  three;  but  the  greatest  of  these  is  charity."  Solomon 
was  as  near  to  a  speculative  philosopher  as  the  Hebrew  mind,  with 

*  The  Works  of  Epictetus  translated  by  T.  W.  Higginson,  pp.  387,  388,  389, 


190  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

its  intensely  practical  and  spiritual  bent,  apparently  could  come; 
and  he  joins  in  the  solemn  verdict  of  the  reason  of  the  heathen 
world,  "naturally  Christian,"  to  the  clear  revelation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  when  he  sums  up  his  speculations  on  life  and  religion  in  the 
close  of  Ecclesiastes:  "Let  us  hear  the  conclusion  of  the  whole 
matter:  Fear  God  and  keep  his  commandments;  for  this  is  the 
whole  duty  of  man." 

This  is  the  end  of  ends.  This  is  the  ultimate  goal  of  that  whole 
vast  sweep  of  catastrophe,  development  and  deliverance  wrought 
out  in  the  history  of  redemption.  As  Paul  expresses  it,  "our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ  gave  himself  for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  all 
iniquity,  and  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous  of  good 
works." 

The  Reformers  felt  this  truth  deeply.  It  is  true,  their  contro- 
versy with  Rome  hinged  on  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  faith. 
But  that  which  drove  them  to  assert  a  free  justification,  without 
regard  to  works,  was  their  recognition,  that  the  righteousness 
demanded  by  God  was  too  high  for  them,  and  yet  only  their  just 
debt.  Man  must  be  justified  gratuitously  through  faith,  because  he 
could  never  fulfil  the  requirements  of  a  law  that  was  holy  and  just 
and  good.  But,  being  justified,  disencumbered  of  his  load  of  past 
guilt,  no  pretence  to  religion  could  be  allowed  for  a  moment  that 
did  not  acknowledge  the  claim  of  the  law  to  a  full  obedience.  No 
faith  could  be  thought  worthy  the  name  that  did  not  spontaneously 
work  the  works  of  holiness.  The  cry  of  the  justified  man  is,  "  Oh, 
how  love  I  thy  law."  Luther  says,  "  It  is  necessary  that  pious 
teachers  should  as  diligently  press  the  doctrine  concerning  good 
works  as  the  doctrine  concerning  faith.  .  For  Satan  bitterly  hates 
and  resists  both.  Apart  from  the  matter  of  justification,  no  one  is 
able  to  commend  the  good  works  that  are  commanded  by  God 
highly  enough."* 

Through  the  twilight  of  moral  consciousness  in  the  Church,  the 
Reformers  groped  their  way  to  the  fundamental  truth  of  this  Article. 
It  was  not  seen  so  clearly  then,  as  the  Church  is  coming  to  see  now, 
that  the  one  final  necessity  in  God's  government  is  habitual  and 
actual  goodness.  But  the  Confession  gives  no  uncertain  sound  on 
this  vital  point.     It  declares,  with  a  sufficiency  needing  no  fortifica- 

*See  Gerhard,  Loci  Theolog.,  Vol.  VIII.,  p.  22. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I9I 

tion  in  these  days  of  light  and  strength,  "that  this  faith  must  bring 
forth  good  fruits;  and  that  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good 
works  which  God  has  commanded." 

A  truth  so  cardinal  to  Christianity,  so  imbedded  in  the  whole 
texture  of  Scripture,  so  naturally  apprehended  by  man's  innate  sense 
of  religion,  could  not  have  been  wholly  lost,  even  in  the  corruption 
of  the  Romish  Church.  In  its  formal  affirmation,  it  never  had  been 
lost.  The  phrase  "  good  works  "  had  been  blazoned  on  her  banners, 
and  sounded  from  her  pulpits,  until  it  had  become  nauseous  to  men. 
But,  as  disease  changes  the  healthy  functions  of  the  body  into 
sources  of  evil,  so  the  pervading  plague,  in  the  life  of  that  Church, 
had  turned  the  truth,  that  holiness  is  necessary,  into  a  moral  poison. 
When  the  Reformers  declared  that  "  faith  must  bring  forth  good 
fruits,  and  that  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  good  works,"  the  whole 
Romish  faculty  could  say.  Amen.  But  the  next  step  taken  in  this 
Article  showed  the  gangrene  which,  under  the  name  of  "  good 
works,"  had  eaten  nearly  all  true  holiness  out  of  the  heart  of  the 
Church.  The  first  step,  in  the  definition  of  the  doctrine,  was  to 
determine  what  are  the  "  good  fruits,"  "  good  works,"  that  consti- 
tute holiness. 

II.  The  Nature  and  Limitations  of  the  New  Obedience. 

On  this  point  the  Confession  is  very  explicit.  It  determines  both 
by  exclusion  and  inclusion,  the  scriptural  character  of  that  holiness 
which  is  required  in  believers.  By  declaring  the  rule  of  holiness, 
and  its  origin,  it  defined  what  was  not,  and  what  was,  essential  to 
the  New  Obedience. 

a.  By  exclusion :  "It  is  our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works 
ivhicli  God  has  commanded!'  The  rule  of  "  good  works  "  is  the 
express  command  of  God.  We  are  to  do  those  things  which  God 
bids  us,  and  no  more.  This  one  phrase,  "  which  God  has  com- 
manded," struck  a  fatal  blow.  It  was  a  two-edged  argument.  It 
not  only  sheared  away  the  cunning  web  of  works  of  supereroga- 
tion, which  Rome  had  used  to  catch  souls  in,  as  silly  flies;  but  it 
also  demolished  the  whole  fabric  of  multiplied  devotions,  penances, 
ecclesiastical  duties,  fasts,  pilgrimages,  mortifications,  which  had 
grown  to  a  yoke,  like  that  complained  of  by  Peter,  "  which  neither 
we  nor  our  fathers  were  able  to  bear." 

It  had  been  taught  that  there  were  services  of  religion,  and  good 


192  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

worlcs,  not  demanded  by  the  law  of  God,  and  yet  in  themselves  good, 
and  therefore  worthy  of  reward.  By  the  performance  of  what  were 
called  '' consilia  evaiigelica"  fastings,  pilgrimages,  vows  of  monasti- 
cism,  poverty,  obedience,  continence,  and  the  like,  it  was  held  to  be 
possible  to  lay  up  a  treasure  of  merit  above  and  beyond  all  that  the 
strict  law  of  God  required.*  The  logical  outgrowth  from  this  was 
the  doctrine  of  the  transfer  of  merit,  the  procuring  of  pardon  and 
eternal  life  through  the  merits  of  the  saints. f  Then  followed,  in 
train,  the  intercession  of  saints,  the  mechanical  theory  of  holiness, 
by  which  righteousness  was  made  something  that  could  be  put  on 
and  taken  off,  without  any  change  in  the  inner  man,  until  at  last,  the 
monstrous  shock  of  the  doctrine  of  Papal  indulgence,  according  to 
which  a  man  living  in  sin  could,  for  money,  purchase  pardon  and 
salvation  of, the  Holy  Father  who  kept  the  treasury  of  the  saints' 
merits,  roused  the  besotted  nations  to  the  protest  of  the  Reformation. 

This  simple  phrase  of  the  Confession,  "  which  God  has  com- 
manded," like  the  smiting  of  the  sun  on  the  rack  of  the  morning 
mist,  dissolved  the  whole  cunning  fabric  of  works  of  supereroga- 
tion. That  only  is  true  obedience  which  can  show  for  its  sanction  a 
"  Thus  saith  the  Lord." 

Luther  says,  in  his  Sermon  concerning  good  works,  "  it  is  re- 
quired of  any  work  that  professes  to  be  a  service  of  God,  not  only  that 
it  aim  at  the  glory  of  God,  but  also  that  it  be  commanded  by  him." 

"  Those  good  works  are  not  truly  good,  which  each  one  devises 
himself  with  a  good  intention,  or  which  are  performed  according  to 
human  tradition,  but  those  which  God  himself  has  prescribed  and 
commanded  in  his  word. "J 

Chemnitz  in  his  chapter,  ''quae  sint  opera  171  qidbiis  Dens  viilt 
renatos  exercere  obedieniiam,''  details  at  length  the  rule  of  new  obe- 
dience: 

^Bellarmin,  in  defending  this  doctrine,  goes  so  far  as  to  collect  a  number  of 
passages  from  the  early  Church  Fathers,  Origen,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianzum, 
Chrysostom,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Gregory  the  Great,  to  show  that  they  held  the 
doctrine  of  works  which  more  than  satisfy  the  requirement  of  the  law. — Mai- 
ler s  Christian  Doctrine  of  Sin,  Vol.  I.,  p.  51. 

t"  Thomas  Aquinas  places  the  evangelical  counsels,  and  the  more  than  suf- 
ficient works,  entirely  in  the  sphere  of  asceticism  ;  "  i.  e.,  they  belong  to  a 
sphere  of  holiness  beyond  what  the  strict  law  requires,  and  above  the  capacity 
of  ordinary  men. — Mailers  Christian  Doctrijie  of  Sin,  Vol.  I.,  p.  52. 

X  Formula  of  Concord — Good  Works. 


NEW    OBEDIE^XE.  1 93 

1.  Not  what  seems  to  us  right. 

2.  Not  what  has  been  suggested  by  our  good  intent. 

3.  Not  what  has  been  handed  down  from  our  fathers. 

4.  ])ut  what  God  has  positively  commanded.* 

In  another  place,  he  condenses  the  scriptural  argument  against 
works  of  supererogation  into  a  nutshell:  "It  is  most  true  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  renews  the  heart  and  makes  it  will  and  do  obedience  to 
God.  Does  God  therefore  wish  that  the  renewed  should,  of  their 
own  motion  and  private  counsel,  or  from  traditions  of  men,  choose 
the  works  wherein  they  shall  glorify  God?  By  no  means:  for  Paul 
expressly  condemns  E^E2.o^p?jaKeiag  (self-imposed  services)  (Col.  ii.  23). 
God  wishes,  therefore,  the  whole  life  of  the  regenerate  to  be  ruled 
by  his  word,  not  only  in  faith,  but  also  in  good  works.  Charity, 
which  is  the  root  and  sum  of  all  good  works,  is  said  to  be  no  more 
than  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."t 

The  horns  of  the  dilemma,  on  which  the  whole  theory  of  "  works  " 
was  impaled,  were  inevitable.  If  a  work  is  conmianded  by  God, 
then  it  is  our  duty  to  do  it,  and  when  it  is  done  most  perfectly,  we 
have  only  performed  our  whole  duty;  if  not  commanded,  it  is  no 
"good  work."  "Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hand?"  is  the 
stern  query  with  which  all  "  cvaiigelica  consilia  "  and  works  of  su- 
pererogation are  met. 

This  was  returning  to  the  old  landmarks.  It  was  a  reinstatement 
of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  as  the  only  infalli- 
ble rule  of  practice.  It  was  not  only  a  declaration  of  the  necessity 
of  holiness,  but  it  was  also  a  determination  of  the  standard  by  which 
all  goodness  was  to  be  measured  and  directed.  It  was  not  only 
pointing  out  the  direction  in  which  we  must  steer,  but  it  was  fur- 
nishing also  the  chart  and  compass  by  which  to  steer.  The  Re- 
formers aimed  primarily  to  correct  the  errors  of  the  Roman  apos- 
tasy. But  their  correction,  like  all  true  reform,  reached  farther  than 
they  could  see : 

"  they  builded  better  than  they  knew." 


They   ha\'e   furnished    a   permanent   rule   of  true   righteousness. 
What  is  the  boundary  of  right?     Where  does  the  domain  of  abso- 

*  Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  Tertia,  p.  14. 
t  Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  Tertia,  p.  37. 


194  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

lute  duty  end,  and  the  field  of  expedience,  the  weighing  of  means 
and  ends,  begin?  How  clear  is  the  definition  of  the  Confession: 
"  those  good  works  which  God  has  commanded." 

We  may  test  the  universal  application  of  this  rule  on  some  of  the 
latest-born  errors  of  our  own  times.  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill  represents  a 
movement  in  our  day,  to  put  aside  the  express  command  of  God  as 
a  standard  of  right,  on  the  ground  that  Christian  morality  is  defi- 
cient in  scope.  "  Many  essential  elements  of  the  highest  morality," 
says  this  author  in  his  work  "  On  Liberty,"  "  are  among  the  things 
which  are  not  provided  for  in  the  recorded  deliverances  of  the 
Founder  of  Christianity.  *  *  i  believe  that  other  ethics  than 
any  which  can  be  evolved  from  exclusively  Christian  sources  must 
exist  side  by  side  with  Christian  ethics,  to  produce  the  moral  regen- 
eration of  mankind."  This  has  a  very  grand  sound :  the  revelation 
that  is  heralded  with  such  solemn  trumpetings  must  be  splendid, 
indeed.  But  when  Mr.  Mill  descends  from  the  sublimities  of  vague 
generalities,  to  specify  the  corrections  he  would  graft  on  the  moral 
code  propounded  in  God's  word,  we  find  that  it  is  with  his  scheme, 
as  with  a  great  deal  of  modern  philosophy,  "  ignotiim  pro  magnifico 
esty  Christian  ethics  are  too  narrow  for  modern  expansion.  Why? 
"Its  ideal,"  Mr.  Mill  answers,  "is  negative  rather  than  positive; 
passive  rather  than  active;  innocence  rather  than  nobleness;  absti- 
nence from  evil  rather  than  energetic  pursuit  of  good.  In  its  pre- 
cepts (as  has  been  well  said),  'Thou  shalt  not'  predominates  unduly 
over  '  Thou  shalt.' "  We  have  only  to  confront  this  (calling  it  by 
the  mildest  name)  misrepresentation  with  the  simple  utterance  of 
Christ  to  see  its  falsity:  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with 
all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself"  Add  to  this  the  elaborations 
of  Christ's  command  to  be  found  in  the  twelfth  chapter  of  Romans, 
the  third  and  fourth  of  Philippians,  and  in  the  close  of  Paul's 
epistles  generally — and  it  must  be  a  strange  conscience  that  com- 
plains of  this  rule  of  the  Confession  as  too  circumscribed.  "The 
good  works  which  God  has  commanded  "  in  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taments, open  a  field  for  the  "energetic  pursuit  of  good,"  which  the 
noblest  men  the  world  has  ever  held,  have  confessed  themselves  un- 
able to  fill  up,  or  even  to  fully  compass  in  their  thoughts. 

It  is  not  strange  that  men  disallowing  the  validity  of  the  Scrip- 
tures as  the  revealed  will  of  God,  should  disparage  the  ethics  of  the 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I  95 

Bible.  But  something  of  this  supercilious  feehng  of  superiority  to 
the  plain  rule  of  God's  word  reveals  itself  in  the  new  command- 
ments promulgated  touching  good  morals  in  many  quarters  pro- 
fessedly Christian.  The  so-called  liberal  and  radical  churches  of  our 
day  are  full  of  these  maggots  of  a  new  and  advanced  morality, 
which  are  to  hatch  out  into  something  that  shall  soar  beyond  the 
narrow  pales  of  the  written  word.  New  virtues  are  invented,  and 
new  sins  discovered  every  day.  Yesterday  a  new  commandment 
was  proclaimed:  "Thou  shalt  not  drink  wine."  To-day  another 
precept  is  added :  "  Thou  shalt  give  the  ballot  to  woman."  All 
questions  of  expedience  and  means  are  attempted  to  be  brought 
within  the  scope  of  a  positive  moral  precept.  And  he  who  holds 
only  by  the  Decalogue  and  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  in  danger 
of  being  thought  no  better  than  a  publican  and  sinner.  To  all  such 
inventors  of  new  virtues  it  may  be  commended  as  a  wholesome  ex- 
ercise, to  ponder  the  simple  rule  of  the  Confession,  "  it  is  our  duty 
to  perform  those  good  works  which  God  has  commanded."  "Those," 
says  Prof.  Alexander,  "  who  undertake  to  be  more  righteous  than 
God's  law,  in  any  respect,  will  be  sure  to  compensate  their  work  of 
supererogation  by  greater  license  in  some  other  form  of  sin.  I  once 
knew  a  candidate  for  the  ministry  who  denounced  as  a  sin  eating 
meat  and  drinking  tea  and  coffee,  and,  if  I  remember  right,  any  vio- 
lation of  Prof  Hitchcock's  prescription  for  avoiding  dyspepsia.  He 
ended  with  becoming  the  hierophant  of  a  conventicle  of  free-love  Per- 
fectionists, and  doing  what  he  might  to  turn  temples  into  brothels." 
b.  By  inclusion.  The  Confession  not  only  excluded  from  the  defi- 
nition of  "good  works"  the  notions  of  men  and  the  traditions  of  the 
Church.  It  included,  also,  within  its  scope  that  which  practically 
Rome  had  cast  out.  The  phrase  "  good  works "  had,  under  the 
manipulation  of  the  ecclesiastical  system,  been  emptied  of  nearly  all 
spiritual  meaning.  To  the  Romish  layman  the  term  meant  not  love 
to  God,  love  to  men,  purity  of  heart,  "  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit,"  but 
the  performance  of  innumerable  external  acts  of  devotion,  penance, 
ritual  correctness,  and  the  like.  Plence  the  tremendous  recoil  of 
Protestantism  against  these  so-called  "  good  works  ;  "  a  rebound  so 
violent  as  to  occasion  the  reproach  of  the  Romish  writers  that  the 
Reformers  despised  good  works,  and  taught  that  there  was  no  need 
of  them.  But  the  Confession  is  equally  careful  to  assert  the  abso- 
lute necessity  of  the  New  Obedience,  and  to  point  out  its  origin  and 


196  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

scope.  They,  and  they  only,  are  truly  good  works,  which  flow  from 
a  living  fdith  in  God.  '*  This  faith  "  (that  described  in  Article  IV.) 
'' vmst  bring  forth  good  fruits."  The  New  Obedience  is  to  come 
forth,  not  on  the  mechanical  compulsion  of  an  ecclesiastical  command, 
nor  at  the  sheer  impulse  of  hope  and  fear  in  an  unrenewed  heart, 
but  from  a  faith  that  works  by  love. 

"The  first  and  chief  work,"  says  Melanchthon,  "is  faith  itself: 
God  especially  requires  in  his  worshipers  this  faith,  and  this  confi- 
dence produces  the  love  of  God."*  This  gives  us  the  source  and 
extent  of  the  New  Obedience.  It  begins  in  faith.  It  is  fed  at  that 
deepest  of  all  fountains  in  human  nature,  opened  only  by  the 
divine  hand,  the  trust  of  the  soul  in  an  invisible,  but  real  and  ever 
present  God.  The  world,  in  its  best  moods,  has  conceived  of  high, 
ideals  of  virtue  and  rectitude,  but  it  could  never  command  the  energy 
to  make  them  actual.  Men  have  dreamed  beautifully  of  goodness 
but  none  have  ever  been  able  to  put  it  into  fact,  nor  even  long  to  keep 
their  dream  before  them  clear  in  outline  and  fresh  in  color.f     There 

*Corpus  Reformat.,  Vol.  XXL,  pp.  311,  312. 

jLecky  notices  the  immeasurable  superiority  of  Christianity  over  Paganism 
in  this  respect,  in  a  very  brilliant  passage  :  "The  ethics  of  Paganism  were  part 
of  a  philosophy.  The  ethics  of  Christianity  were  part  of  a  religion.  The  first 
were  the  speculations  of  a  few  highly  cultivated  individuals,  and  neither  had, 
nor  could  have,  any  direct  influence  upon  the  masses  of  mankind.  The  second 
were  indissolubly  connected  with  the  worship,  hopes  and  fears  of  a  vast  reh- 
gious  system,  that  acts  at  least  as  powerfully  on  the  most  ignorant  as  on  the 
most  educated.  The  objects  of  the  Pagan  systems  were  to  foretell  the  future, 
to  explain  the  universe,  to  avert  calamity,  to  obtain  the  assistance  of  the  gods. 
They  contain  no  instruments  of  moral  teaching  analogous  to  our  institution  of 
preaching,  or  to  to  the  moral  preparation  for  the  reception  of  the  sacrament,  or 
to  confession,  or  to  the  reading  of  the  Bible,  or  to  united  prayer  for  spiritual 
benefits.  To  make  men  virtuous  was  no  more  the  function  of  the  priest  than 
of  the  physician.  On  the  other  hand,  the  philosophic  expositions  of  duty  were 
wholly  unconnected  with  the  religious  ceremonies  of  the  temple.  To  amalga- 
mate these  two  spheres,  to  incorporate  moral  culture  with  religion,  and  thus  to 
enlist  in  its  behalf  that  desire  to  enter,  by  means  of  ceremonial  observances, 
into  direct  communication  with  Heaven,  which  experience  has  shown  to  be  one 
of  the  most  universal  and  powerful  passions  of  mankind,  was  among  the  most 
important  achievements  of  Christianity.  It  was  the  distinguishing  characteristic 
of  Christianity,  that  its  moral  influence  was  not  indirect,  casual,  remote,  or 
spasmodic."  (History  of  European  Morals,  vol.  ii.,  p.  2.)  Mr.  Lecky  dwells 
mainly  on  the  instruments  of  this  moral  culture,  preaching,  sacraments,  read- 
ing the  Bible,  united  worship;  but  all  these  only  lead  our  thoughts  along  to  the 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  1 97 

is  no  future  for  any  rectitude  that  is  not  rooted  in  God.  There  is  no 
summer  flow  for  the  streams  that  head  short  of  the  heart  of  the 
mountains.  This  unfailing  spring  the  Confession  finds  in  the  faith 
that  unites  to  God. 

"  With  the  reconciliation  to  God,  that  is  effected  by  faith,  comes 
also  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  renews  the  heart  and  causes 
it  to  begin  to  love  God,  and  delight  in  his  law  after  the  inner  man  : 
in  this  way  come  good  works,  and  they  are  truly  such  which  pro- 
ceed from  such  a  root."* 

Thus  the  Confession  supplies,  in  the  strong  throbbing  heart  of 
faith,  an  engine  that  can  propel  the  whole  machinery  of  right  living. 
"  I  can  do  all  things  through  Christ  which  strengtheneth  me."  It  is 
faith  that  unites  to  Christ,  and  so  to  God.  It  is  faith  that  enables 
man  to  bring  forth  good  fruits.  Justification  and  sanctification  are 
thus  seen  to  be  twin  branches  shooting,  with  their  broad  latitude 
of  grateful  shade  and  fruitage,  from  the  one  trunk  of  a  living  faith. 
We  are  saved  by  faith,  and  we  are  made  clean  and  able  to  good 
works,  holy  living,  by  the  same  faith  in  God. 

One  point  more,  and  we  have  done  with  this^side  of  our  subject. 
What  is  the  scope  of  this  term,  "good  works?"  What  are  the 
"  good  fruits"  that  "  faith  must  bring  forth,"  the  "good  works"  which 
"  it  is  our  duty  to  perform  ?"  The  nature  of  the  truth  declared  is 
disguised  somewhat  by  the  narrow  and  technical  character  of  the 
terms  used.  The  phrases  "  good  fruits,"  "  good  works,"  meant  to 
the  ear  of  the  world  that  had  been  so  long  filled  with  the  teaching  of 
Rome,  only  outward  acts  of  morality,  or  even  less  than  this,  mere 
ritualistic  observances  and  ecclesiastical  duties.  They  were  almost 
hopelessly  infected  with  the  plague  of  formalism  and  a  technical 
holiness.  They  were  but  poorly  fitted  to  carry  the  large  meaning 
of  the  Reformers. 

It  is  almost  sad  to  see  how  the  men  who  built  the  superstructure 
of  the  New  Theology,  labor  to  disentangle  their  deep  scriptural 
views  concerning  holiness  from  the  trammels  of  words  which  they 
felt,  in  a  manner,  compelled  to  use.     They  were  not  the  first,  nor  the 

source  whence  flowed  the  life  that  used  these,  to  that  "faith,"  which  "is   the 
substance  of  things  hoped  for,  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen."     It  was  this- 
divine  origin  of  the  New  Obedience  that  the  Confessors  had  in  mind,  when  they 
declared  "  that  this  faith  must  bring  forth  good  fruits." 
*  Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  Tertia,  pp.  29,  30. 
14 


198  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

last,  who  gave  birth  to  thoughts  too  great  to  be  cradled  in  the  lan- 
guage of  their  schools  and  times.  They  meant,  in  their  struggling 
way,  to  declare  that  true  religion  must  include  right  living,  that 
holiness  of  life  is  eternally  wedded  to  faith  in  God.  But  the  words 
by  which  they  affirm  this  are  like  the  shield  in  the  old  story  that 
showed  red  or  white  as  it  was  seen  from  opposite  sides:  to  the  Ro- 
man antagonists  they  meant  one  thing  ;  to  us,  who  read  them  in  the 
light  of  their  whole  theology,  altogether  another.  Expand  these 
words,  "  good  fruits,"  "  good  works,"  to  mean  holiness  of  heart  and 
life,  and  we  have  the  doctrine  the  authors  of  the  Confession  intended 
to  teach. 

Chemnitz,  in  his  chapter,  "  Qii<2  opera  facienda,"  says:  "  Not  only 
is  it  our  duty  to  perform  the  external  works  of  the  Decalogue,  which 
even  impious  men  can  counterfeit,  but  also  to  originate  an  inward 
obedience.  But  these  inner  works  are  belief  in  God's  word,  the  fear 
of  God,  trust  in  God."* 

"  The  first  and  chief  grade  of  good  works,"  says  Gerhard,  "  is  in- 
ward obedience  of  the  heart  to  God,  of  which  the  principal  parts  are 
the  fear  and  love  of  God."  He  then  proceeds,  in  the  order  of  their 
dignity,  to  specify  five  classes  of  good  works,  in  the  last  of  which  he 
puts  "the  ceremonial  duties  of  the  first  table;"  meaning  by  these 
what  may  be  called  ritualistic  or  ecclesiastical  observances. f  This 
was  just  reversing  the  old  order.  Rome  had  so  long  accustomed 
men  to  a  mere  mechanical  performance  of  routine  duties,  that  it  was 
almost  forgotten  what  holiness  was.  Her  highest  virtue  was  obe- 
dience to  the  Church.  A  spiritual,  inward  obedience,  seemed  some- 
thing very  petty.  Her  order  of  obligation  was,  first  the  Church, 
then  man,  then  God.  Baxter  declares,  in  one  of  his  characteristic 
passages,  that  after  much  horror  of  Rome,  as  corrupt  in  doctrine,  he 
had,  in  his  riper  wisdom,  come  to  see  that  her  worst  heresy  was 
that  of  practice.  "  Ignorance  and  immorality  in  the  people,"  was 
her  high  crime.  The  substitution  of  artificial  duties,  pertaining  to 
the  outward  life,  for  what  the  old  writers  love  to  call  works  of  in- 
ward obedience,  the  inward  motions  of  the  Spirit,  was  a  worse 
error,  in  reality,  than  Mariolatry,  Purgatory,  Intercession  of  Saints, 
or  even  Justification  by  Works.     This  error  the  authors  of  the  Con- 


*  Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  Tertia,  p,  i. 
fLoci  Theolog.,  J.  Gerhard,  Vol.  VIII,,  p.  2. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  I  99 

fession  corrected,  by  restoring  to  their  large,  scriptural  and  spiritual 
sense,  the  terms,  "  good  fruits,"  "  good  works."  Good  works  were 
— Love  to  God,  Trust  in  God,  Love  to  men.  Purity  of  heart  and  life 
— in  fine,  the  "fruits  of  the  Spirit,"  described  by  the  apostle.  Thus 
the  stream  of  a  living  faith  was  turned  at  last  into  that  Augean 
stable,  the  Romish  doctrine  of  "  works." 

We  come,  in  the  course  of  our  inquiry,  to  consider, 

III.  The  Grounds  of  Obligation  to  the  New  Obedience. 

To  the  mind  of  the  Reformers,  this  was  the  most  important  side 
of  the  whole  doctrine.  This  is  evident  from  the  ver\'  structure  of 
the  Article.  It  has  on  it  the  smell  of  battle.  It  is  framed,  in  this 
part  of  it,  with  a  view  to  defence  against  the  errors  of  Rome,  rather 
than  to  a  positive  and  purely  dogmatic  statement  of  the  truth. 
Negatively,  therefore,  the  ground  of  obligation  is  stated,  and  de- 
fended quite  at  length :  "They  teach  that  this  faith  must  bring  forth 
good  fruits,  etc.,  *  *  not  in  the  expectation  of  thereby  meriting  justi- 
fication before  God.  For,  remission  of  sins,  and  Justification.,  are 
secured  by  faith ;  as  the  declaration  of  Christ  testifies :  '  When  ye 
shall  have  done  all  those  things,  say.  We  are  unprofitable  servants! 
The  same  thing  is  taught  by  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  zuriters :  for 
Ambrose  says :  '  This  lias  been  ordained  of  God,  that  he  luho  believes 
in  Christ  shall  be  saved  zuithout  zvorks,  receiving  remission  of  sins 
tlirough  faith  alone!  "  This  was  to  meet  the  ground  of  obligation 
that  logically  correlated  itself  to  the  Romish  theory  of  salvation.  At 
Rome  salvation  had  a  definite  price.  Man,  it  was  taught,  could, 
and  must,  merit  pardon  and  obtain  eternal  life,  on  the  ground  of  just 
desert  in  return  for  his  righteous  obedience.  He  was  to  enter 
heaven  because,  in  virtue  of  his  good  works,  he  had  a  claim  to 
eternal  life.  Hence  the  necessity  of  good  works.  They  were  the 
price  paid  for  salvation.  I  must  do  them  because  they  arc  the  only 
coin  current  on  the  exchange  of  heaven. 

Such  a  view  of  the  necessity  of  good  works  was  destructive  of 
the  very  life  of  Christianity;  and  that  in  a  two-fold  way.  It  de- 
stroyed the  character  of  grace,  and  changed  God  from  a  Father, 
freely  pardoning  his  children,  and  preparing  for  them,  out  of  his 
own  resources,  a  way  of  redemption,  to  a  .spiritual  merchant,  selling 
pardon  and  heaven  for  a  sufficient  quantity  of  righteousness.  As 
Paul  has  put  it :  "  If  by  grace,  then  it  is  no  more  of  works :  other- 


200  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

wise  grace  is  no  more  grace.  But  if  it  be  of  works,  then  it  is  no 
more  grace." 

As  a  second  and  equally  disastrous  consequence,  this  view  robbed 
the  practice  of  goodness  of  its  highest  value.  It  degraded  holy 
living  from  its  high  rank  as  the  outflow  of  a  spiritual  faith  in  God, 
the  outleap  of  the  heart  to  the  Father  of  grace  and  goodness,  to  be 
only  the  stipulated  price  of  a  bargained  salvation.  It  has  been 
charged  on  Christianity,  as  a  grave  defect,  that  it  "holds  out  the 
hope  of  heaven  and  the  threat  of  hell,  as  the  appointed  and  appropri- 
ate motives  to  a  virtuous  life;  in  this  falling  far  beyond  the  best  of 
the  ancients,  and  doing  what  lies  in  it  to  give  to  human  morality  an 
essentially  selfish  character."*  The  Romish  ground  of  obligation 
to  good  works,  goes  far  to  justify  whatever  of  truth  there  is  in  this 
charge.  "  Do  good,"  says  the  Romish  theology,  in  substance,  "that 
you  may  be  safe."  Surely,  an)^  teaching  that  makes  holiness,  in  its 
naked  beauty,  less  beautiful  and  venerable  in  the  eyes  of  men,  must 
be  contrary  to  the  mind  of  God. 

The  guarded  statement  of  Art.  IV.,  "that  men  cannot  be  justified 
before  God  by  their  own  strength,  merits,  or  works;  but  that  they 
are  justified  gratuitously,  for  Christ's  sake,  through  faith,"  was  suf- 
ficient refutation  of  the  corrupt  doctrine  of  Rome.  But  the  Con- 
fessors, like  men  who  having  in  trust  a  priceless  treasure,  make 
assurance  doubly  sure,  and  post  triple  lines  of  sentinels  about  the 
key  of  their  position,  guard  against  this  error  by  the  negative 
declaration  of  the  doctrine  of  "good  works."  Not  content  with 
their  own  decided  declaration,  they  fortify  their  position  with  the 
testimony  of  Christ,  and  the  authority  of  the  Fathers.  They  felt 
themselves  called  to  this  apparently  redundant  defence,  the  more 
especially  because  it  had  been  maintained  that,  however  good  works 
might  be  excluded  from  any  share  in  meriting  or  procuring  justifi- 
cation, they  were  yet  necessary  to  obtaining  the  rewards  of  salvation, 
and  for  retaining  salvation  after  it  had  been  freely  given.  The  con- 
troversies, that  fought  themselves  out,  died,  and  were  renewed,  about 
these  fine  distinctions,  were  interminable.  We  may  sum  up,  in  the 
blunt  words  of  Chemnitz,  the  gist  of  the  whole  matter,  and  remark 
how  the  theologians  of  that  period  construed  and  defended  the 
negative  side  of  this  Article. 

*J.  Stuart  Mill,  on  Liberty. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  20I 

"It  is  not  true,  as  some  pretend,  that  good  works,  although  un- 
necessary to  merit  or  obtain  salvation,  are  necessary  to  retain,  pre- 
serve, and  complete  our  final  safety.  For  the  form  of  apostolic 
doctrine  attributes  the  preservation  and  completion  of  salvation,  its 
middle  and  end,  as  well  as  its  beginning,  to  the  grace  of  God  alone, 
for  Christ's  sake,  without  works ;  which  grace  is  received,  retained, 
and  preserved  through  faith  alone.  'By  faith  we,'  not  only 'have 
access  into  this  grace;'  but  also  by  faith  'we  stand  in  this  grace,' 
and,  by  faith,  'rejoice  in  hope  of  the  glory  of  God.'  (Rom.  v.  2)."* 
This,  with  Quenstedt's  felicitous  epigram,  may  suffice  for  the  nega- 
tive side  of  this  part  of  our  subject :  "  Good  works  are  not  the  way 
to,  but  only  ways  in  the  kingdom. "f  To  this  add  one,  from  Ger- 
hard, even  happier:  "  Good  works  do  not  make  one  good,  they  only 
show  him  to  be  so."| 

We  turn  now  to  the  positive  side  of  the  ground  of  obligation.  If 
good  works  are  not  necessary  to  obtain  pardon  and  salvation,  on 
what  ground  are  they  necessary?  The  answer  of  the  Confession  to 
this  is  clear  and  final.  Its  authors  do  not,  after  the  fashion  of  much 
modern  reform  in  theology,  demolish  the  ancient  bulwarks  of  re- 
ligion to  leave  those  who  had  trusted  in  them  naked  and  defenseless. 
The  Romish  ground  of  obligation  to  good  works,  viz.:  that  of  their 
essential  merit  in  the  purchase  of  salvation,  though  utterly  unten- 
able and  bad  enough  in  its  practical  results,  was  yet  better  than  no 
ground  of  obligation  at  all.  It  was  better  to  be  impelled  to  right 
living,  with  the  hope  of  securing  heaven  thereby,  than  to  have  no 
impulse  at  all.  It  is  better  now  for  the  millions  of  the  Romish  com- 
munion to  believe  that  good  works  must  be  done  to  secure  salva- 
tion, than  to  believe  right  living  has  no  real  ground  of  obligation 
outside  of  the  fantasy  and  self-imposed  yoke  of  one's  own  sense  of 
moral  fitness.  It  is  better  to  be  an  Austria,  besotted,  \-et  having 
some  ground  of  obligation  felt  by  its  subjects,  than  a  France,  with 
the  false  ground  removed,  but  none  put  in  its  place. 

The  Confessors  were  ready  to  replace  the  crazy  bulwark  which 
Rome  had  furnished.  "This  faith  mu.st  bring  forth  good  fruits. 
*     *     It  is  our  duty  to  do  those  good  works  which  God  has  com- 

*  Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  III.,  p.  53. 

f  Quenstedii  Theolog.  Didactico-Polemica,  Pars  \W,  p.  331. 

tLoci  Theolog.,  J.  Gerhard,  Vol.  VIII.,  p.  25. 


202  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

manded,  because  it  is  his  will."  The  more  we  study  this  simple 
declaration,  the  more  impregnable  will  appear  their  position,  the 
more  pregnant  the  words  they  use.  Why  must  we  do  these  good 
works?  Because  "  it  is  our  duty."  What  obligation  to  the  prac- 
tice of  a  holy  life?  Because  "it  is  the  will  of  God."  It  will  be 
observ^ed  that  there  are  two  steps  taken  in  the  statement  and  unfold- 
ing of  this  ground  of  obligation. 

a.  "  It  is  our  duty!'  The  ground  is  that  of  moral  right.  The  force 
of  the  original  is,  if  anything,  stronger  :  "  dtbiai"  "  oporteat."  The 
appeal  here  is  to  the  ultimate  imperative  of  conscience.  We  must, 
because  we  ought.  No  idea  in  human  consciousness  is  more  unique 
than  that  expressed  by  the  word  "  ought."  It  carries  us  into  a  realm 
as  new  as  that  into  which  sight  introduces  us.  Its  deliverances  are 
wholly  untranslatable  into  other-  forms.  It  emerges  into  conscious- 
ness with  a  distinction  like  that  of  another  sense.  It  makes  its 
deliverances  with  an  authority  that,  though  often  opposed,  hated, 
derided,  though  often  traversing  the  dearest  schemes  of  man's 
ambition  and  pleasure,  yet  has  been  felt  by  all  men,  in  their  highest 
moments,  to  be  irresistible  and  full  of  the  highest  inspiration.  It 
has  been  recognized,  to  use  Lecky's  eloquent  words,  as  "  constitut- 
ing at  once  the  evidence  of  a  Divine  element  within  us,  and  the 
augury  of  the  future  that  is  before  us."  But  modern  speculation 
has  undertaken  to  resolve  this  idea  into  simpler  elements.  Under 
the  analysis  of  the  subtlest  psychology  the  world  has  ever  seen,  the 
associational  philosophy  of  Bain  and  Mill,  this  imperative  of  con- 
science resolves  itself  back  into  certain  natural  effects  of  association. 
Certain  impulses  of  hope  and  fear,  say  these  writers,  become  con- 
nected by  association  with  certain  prescribed  courses  of  conduct. 
These  associations  are  transmitted,  in  continually  increasing  strength, 
from  generation  to  generation,  till  all  traces  of  the  connection  by 
which  they  were  formed  are  lost,  and  only  the  residuum  of  actual 
tendency  is  left.  This  tendency  is  what  we  call  conscience.  What 
we  took  for  the  voice  of  God  is  only  the  vibration  of  a  nerve  that 
goes  on  recording  itself  long  after  the  blow  that  caused  it  is 
forgotten.  What  we  respected  as  the  imperative  of  a  moral  sense, 
final  and  authoritative,  is  only  the  recurrence  of  certain  impulses, 
set  in  motion  in  our  ancestors  far  beyond  our  knowledge. 

This  is  very  simple.  But  is  it  true?  The  philosophers  seem  to 
have    analyzed   all    the   authority  of  conscience  away.      But    their 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  203 

analysis  steers  its  airy  way  through  the  empty  heaven  of  hypothesis. 
Their  train  of  argument,  like  the  gossamer  thread  of  the  spider  that 
lets  itself  down  out  of  the  clear  sky,  has  no  perceptible  holding- 
place.  There  is  not,  in  all  their  fine  fabric,  so  solid  a  fact  as  the 
simple  testimony  of  conscience. 

Two  voices  sound  from  the  soul,  which  no  philosophy  has  ever 
been  able  authoritatively  to  silence  or  to  contradict:  "I  am,"  and  "  I 
ought."  Huxley  himself,  fiercest  and  ablest,  though  frankest,  of  the 
materialist  school,  confesses  reluctantly,  that,  for  the  first  of  these 
declarations,  philosophy  has  no  sufficient  answer.  The  testimony 
of  consciousness  to'its  own  free,  self-determining  nature,  is  final.* 
So,  too,  the  testimon}''  of  conscience,  that  we  are  under  a  solemn 
law  of  obligation  to  right,  that  consciousness  expressed  most  tersely 
and  vividly  by  '■'  I  ought,"  is,  at  least  tacitly,  admitted  to  be  irrefut- 
able. In  that  famous  definition,  by  this  same  author,  of  the  "  liberally 
educated  man,"  the  last  crowning  touch  of  completeness  is,  that  his 
"passions  are  trained  to  come  to  heel,  by  a  vigorous  will,  the  ser- 
vant of  a  tender  conscience.'"  What  is  this  but  an  unconscious  testi- 
mony to  the  authority  of  the  moral  sense?  Mr.  Lecky,  who  seems, 
in  his  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  to  make  the  laws  of  right  as 
flexible  and  shifting  as  the  currents  of  the  summer  wind,  yet  testifies, 
at  last,  that  the  "instinctive,  or  moral  nature,  is  as  truly  a  part  of 
our  being,  as  is  our  reason,"  and  "teaches  us  what  reason  could 
never  teach,  the  supreme  and  transcendent  excellence  of  moral 
good."  "  In  it  "  (our  moral  nature),  "we  have  the  common  root  of 
religion  and  of  ethics;  for  the  same  consciousness  that  tells  us  that, 
even  when  it  is  in  fact  the  weakest  element  of  our  constitution,  it  is, 
by  right,  supreme,  commanding  and  authoritative,  teaches  us  also 
that  it  is  Divine."t 

The  very  men  who  anatomize  conscience,  till  there  is  no  soul  of 
force  or  right  left  in  it,  yet  finally  confess,  by  the  very  necessity  of 
their  nature,  by  their  avowed  indignations  and  enthusiasms,  that  the 
dethroned  power,  though  they  have  proved  it  to  be  no  rightful 
power,  still  holds  a  resistless  sceptre. 

*"  Does  human  nature  possess  any  free,  volitional,  or  truly  anthropomorphic 
element,  or  is  it  only  the  cunningest  of  all  Nature's  clocks?  Some,  among 
whom  I  count  myself,  think  the  battle  will  forever  remain  a  drawn  one,  and 
that,  for  all  practical  purposes,  this  result  is  as  good  as  anthropomorphism  win- 
ning the  day." — Lay  Sermons,  Addresses,  etc.,  p.  164. 

fLecky's  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  \'ol.  I.,  pp.  57,  58. 


204  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  Confession  thus  bases  the  obligation  to  right  living  on  a 
ground  of  sanction  that  is,  our  enemies  themselves  being  judges, 
ultimate  and  immovable,  as  constituting  a  part  of  the  fundamental 
law  of  our  nature.  "  It  is  our  duty  to  do  those  good  works  which 
God  has  commanded."  Of  course,  where  the  appeal  is  to  a  tribunal 
whose  judgment  cannot  be  re-argued,  but  is  final,  there  need  no 
links  of  reasoning  to  be  forged  and  welded  to  enforce  the  authority 
of  the  judgment.  When  conscience  speaks  finally  and  decisively, 
the  mind  ceases  from  its  quest  after  a  ground  of  authority.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  Confessors  and  the  theologians  of  the  formative 
period  of  our  confessional  theology,  have  practically  left  their  case, 
so  far  as  this  ground  of  obligation  is  concerned,  to  rest  here.  After 
affirming  that  it  is  our  duty  to  do  "  good  works,"  they  cease  from 
the  attempt  to  show  why  duty  is  a  sufficient  ground  of  obligation, 
or  to  prove,  with  some  modern  philosophers,  that  it  is  necessary 
to  do  what  we  ought  to  do. 

b.  But  there  is  yet  another  step  in  the  process  by  which  the  Re- 
formers established  the  ground  of  obligation  to  good  works  :  "  It  is 
our  duty  to  perform  those  good  works  which  God  has  commanded, 
because  it  is  his  zvill."  They  design  by  this  sanction  to  point  out  the 
source  of  that  moral  imperative,  which  emerges  into  actual  force  in 
the  voice  of  conscience.  We  are  to  do  good  works  because  it  is  our 
duty  :  "  ought,"  says  the  moral  sense,  and  that  is  final.  And  that 
moral  sense  stands  over  the  will  and  life,  as  their  rightful  ruler, 
whose  command  may  be  disobeyed,  but  never  annulled,  because  it  is 
so  constituted  by  the  will  of  God.  The  final  reason  of  all  right  liv- 
ing is,  "  it  is  the  will  of  God." 

The  Reformers  were  not  inclined  to  make  the  Confession  a  place 
for  fine  metaphysical  disquisition.  They  had  no  mind  to  decide  by 
the  use  of  the  term,  "  will  of  God,"  what  is  the  metaphysical  ground 
of  right.  It  is  true,  we  may  press  their  words  to  their  strict  logical 
import,  and  argue,  with  at  least  a  verbal  show  of  justice,  that  they 
expressed  in  this  term,  "  because  it  is  the  will  of  God,"  their  settled 
belief  that  the  ground  of  right  is  the  ultimate,  arbitrary  determina- 
tion of  God.  But  in  all  fairness,  that  construction  cannot  be  pressed- 
They  meant,  as  it  appears  to  me,  to  affirm  only  that,  for  us,  the 
final  ground  and  sanction  of  right  is  to  be  found  in  the  discovered 
will  of  God.  They  leave  undetermined  the  query,  whether  God 
wills  the  constitution  and  nature  of  right  by  a  sheer  exercise  of  his 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  205 

almighty  and  original  fiat,  or  only  declares  a  law  already  existent 
in  the  very  nature  of  things.  We  come  here  to  that  threshing  floor 
of  metaphysical  subtleties,  where  Lowell  satirically  affirms  "theolo- 
gians thresh  their  wheatless  straw." 

The  native  moral  sense  does  not  delay  its  obedience  for  an  an- 
swer to  the  question.  Does  God  will  right  living  because  it  is  right, 
or  is  it  right  because  God  wills  it?  In  every  age  of  the  world,  a 
"Thus  saith  the  Lord"  has  proved  final,  so  far  as  the  demands  of 
the  moral  sense  are  concerned,  and  an  end  of  all  controversy.  If 
there  be  any  reason  of  right  back  of  God's  will  and  pleasure,  it  is  a 
reason  that  the  conscience  and  heart  of  man,  whatever  the  restless 
intellect,  with  its  endless  inquisition,  may  demand,  never  feel  the 
need  of 

"  The  voice  of  duty  is  the  voice  of  God." 

The  elaboration  of  this  simple  and  final  ground  of  obligation,  in 
the  after  controversies  and  dogmatic  theologies  of  the  Lutheran 
Church,  adds  nothing  to  its  force.  They  rather  weaken  it,  on  the 
principle  that  one  strong  argument  and  half  a  dozen  weak  ones 
make  a  feebler  impression  than  the  single  strong  point  left  to  stand 
alone.  Or,  rather,  on  the  principle  that  all  attempted  proof  of  a 
self-evident  truth  obscures  it.  The  ground  of  obligation  defined  in 
the  article  is  self-evident.  It  commends  itself,  at  once,  to  what  is 
deepest  and  purest  in  man.  "It  is  our  duty:"  Every  conscience 
throbs  to  the  call.  "Because  it  is  God's  will:"  That  sounds  like  a 
finality.  It  brings  us  before  the  high  throne,  where  angels  adore 
and  receive  the  word  of  command.  It  fills  and  satisfies  the  highest 
spiritual  sense  as  perfectly  as  the  lowest.  To  base  morality  there, 
is  to  give  it  the  solidest  footing.  To  found  holiness  simply  on  that, 
is  to  make  its  foundation  broad  and  deep  as  religion  itself  No 
sanction  can  be  more  awful  than  the  shadowy  and  supernatural  in- 
fluences, which  this  reference  to  the  unseen  Lawgiver  and  Judge  of 
all  the  earth,  gather  over  the  soul.  No  wooing  to  goodness  can  be 
sweeter  than  that  couched  in  this  simple  declaration,  "  it  is  the  will 
of  God." 

We  give  a  few  of  the  ramifications  into  which  the  theologians  of 
the  development  period  push  out  the  simple  ground  of  obligation 
to  good  works  laid  down  in  this  Article. 

Chemnitz,  in  answer  to  the  question, "  Propter  qi(as  causas  facivnda 
sint  bona  opera?"  tabulates  his  elaborations  as  follows  : 


206  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"  /.    JVi^/i  respect  to  God. 

1.  It  is  his  command. 

2.  It  is  his  wish. 

3.  That  we  may  be  obedient  sons  of  our  Father. 

4.  The  Son  of  God  redeemed  us  to  be  pure. 

5.  Good  works  are  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit. 

6.  That  God  may  be  glorified  through  our  good  works. 

7.  That  we  may  be  imitators  of  God. 

8.  That  we  may  walk  worthy  of  God. 
//.    With  respect  to  ourselves. 

1.  Because  the  renewed  should  be  new  creatures. 

2.  Because  sons  of  light  should  not  walk  in  darkness. 

3.  For  a  testimony  of  true  faith. 

4.  That  the  difference  between  a  dead  and  living  faith  may  be 
marked. 

5.  Lest  faith  and  the  Spirit  be  lost. 

6.  To  escape  punishment  of  this  life. 

7.  To  obtain  the  promised  reward. 
///.    With  respect  to  our  neighbor. 

1.  To  help  him. 

2.  That  we  may  allure  others  to  piety  by  our  example. 

3.  That  we  may  give  no  offence. 

4.  That  by  well-doing  we  may  shut  the  mouths  of  gainsayers." 
These  various  divisions,  which  we  have  given  only  in  brief,  and 

condensed    from    their    original    form,    are    supported    by    copious 
proof-texts  from  the  Scriptures.* 

Gerhard  gives  an  amplification  much  after  the  same  style,  which 
he  sums  up  after  this  fashion  : 

1.  Necessity  of  coinmand,  because  God  in  the  Decalogue  com- 
mands a  zeal  of  good  works. 

2.  Necessity  of  debt,  arising  from  the  former,  because  we  owe  to 
God,  as  our  Creator,  etc.,  filial  obedience,  to  our  neighbor  a  zeal  of 
kindness  and  offices  of  love. 

3.  Necessity  of  order,  because  the  order  of  justice  remains  per- 
petual, that  the  rational  creature  should  obey  the  Creator. 

4.  Necessity  of  consequence,  because  good  works  continually  ac- 
company and  follow  faith. 


*Loci  Theologici  Chemnitii,  Pars  Tertia,  pp.  60,  61. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  20/ 

5.  Necessity  of  hypothesis,  because,  unless  we  would  lose  faith, 
the  grace  of  God,  etc.,  we  must  devote  ourselves  to  good  works." 

To  this  necessity,  MclanchtJion  joined  the  zvorthiness  and  utility 
of  good  works  where,  by  zvorthiness,  is  not  to  be  understood  any 
merit  of  divine  grace,  etc.,  nor  any  perfection  of  good  works  before 
the  judgment  of  God,  nor  causality  in  the  matter  of  justification  ;  but 
a  gratuitous  acceptance  by  God,  who  considers  the  obedience  of  the 
renewed,  that  proceeds  from  faith,  to  be  genuine  and  pleasing,  and 
affixes  to  the  same  gratuitous  rewards. 

Hutter  adds  two  classes,  making  five  : 

1.  Necessity  with  respect  to  God. 

2.  Necessity  with  respect  to  angels. 

3.  Necessity  with  respect  to  our  neighbors. 

4.  Necessity  with  respect  to  ourselves. 

5.  Necessity  with  respect  to  devils. 

The  pious  Gerhard  remarks  naively  that  two  of  these  classes  are 
unnecessary,  with  which  sentiment  I  think  we  can  heartily  agree. 

All  this  elaboration  is,  practically,  so  much  dead  lumber,  in  any 
attempt  to  set  this  great  truth  on  its  firmest  basis.  The  less  there 
is  of  matter,  intermediate  to  the  direct  impact  of  the  will  of  God 
upon  the  conscience,  the  quicker  and  more  tender  is  the  moral 
sense.  Thus  we  find,  in  seasons  of  revival,  when  the  preaching  is 
peculiarly  theological  (using  this  term  in  its  technical  sense),  when 
less  of  the  motives  to  duty,  and  the  reasons  for  holiness,  are  pro- 
fessedly set  forth,  but  God  is  held  up,  his  character  and  will  and 
positive  law,  the  stronger  the  influence  upon  the  consciences  of 
men.  The  ideas  of  God  and  God's  command,  laid  on  the  mind,  burn 
their  way  through  to  the  very  quick  of  conscience,  and  kindle  the 
most  ardent  flame  of  holy  practice. 

We  have  to  notice  the  corrective  character  of  this  ground  of  obli- 
gation in  relation  to  errors  that  rose  on  this  subject  in  later  times. 
These  errors  we  may  trace  all  to  a  single  root,  an  undervaluation  of 
holiness,  as  an  end  in  itself  Whatever  leads  men,  theoretically  or 
practically,  to  regard  goodness  as  a  means  to  an  end,  rather  than  an 
end  sufficient  in  itself,  is  false  to  Scripture,  and  false  to  the  necessi- 
ties of  man's  own  nature.  "This  is  the  will  of  God,  even  your 
sanctification."  (i  Thess.  iv.  3).  "  The  end  of  the  commandment  is 
charity  out  of  a  pure  heart,  and  of  a  good  conscience,  and  of  fiith 
unfeigned."     (i   Tim.  i.  5.)     This  has   been  effected   in   two  quite 


208  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 


opposite  directions :  by  men  very  religious,  and  by  men  very  irre- 
ligious. 

In  the  terrible  recoil  from  good  works  because  of  the  taint  they 
had  got  whilst  serving  in  the  mill  at  Rome,  the  Church  was  in  dan- 
ger of  falling  into  an  error  quite  as  pernicious.  When  men  recoil 
from  a  bad  thing,  they  generally  go  into  an  opposite  extreme  very 
nearly  as  bad. 

Accordingly  we  find,  close  on  the  crash  of  the  Reformation,  a 
heresy  springing  up  in  the  new  Church,  out  of  the  ashes  of  the 
corrupt  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Works,  as  we  see  new  growths 
of  another  species  put  forth  from  the  ashes  of  a  burned  forest.  John 
Agricola,  an  early  helper  of  Luther,  seized  on  some  extravagant 
expressions  of  the  great  Reformer,  with  reference  to  the  worth- 
lessness  of  good  works  as  of  saving  efficacy,*  and  speedily  brought 
forth,  as  a  legitimate  consequence  of  Justification  by  faith,  the  doc- 
trine that  believers  are  under  no  obligation  to  keep  the  law  or  do 
good  works.  When,  in  the  "  Instruction  to  the  Pastors  of  the 
Saxon  Electorate"  (1527),  it  was  enjoined  that  "all  pastors  must 
teach  and  enforce  diligently  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  not  only 
the  Commandments  themselves,  but  also  the  penalties  which  God 
has  affixed  to  the  violation  of  them,"  Agricola  bitterly  assailed 
Luther  and  Melanchthon  as  departing  from  the  true  faith  of  the 
Gospel,  and  declared  that  the  Decalogue  is  not  binding  on  Chris- 
tians.f  He  was  followed  later  by  Nicolas  Amsdorf,  and  Otto  of 
Nordhausen.  Amsdorf,  in  opposing  the  errors  of  one  George  Major, 
Professor  at  Wittenberg,  who  taught  the  necessity  of  good  works  to 
salvation,  declared  that  good  works  were  pernicious  to  salvation. 
In  a  more  extravagant  form  still,  the  Anabaptists,  who  plagued  Lu- 
ther more  than  the  Papists,  scouted  the  idea  that  it  was  wrong  for 

*  Luther,  in  his  writings  against  the  Zwickau  enthusiasts,  says,  "  These  teach- 
ers of  sin  annoy  us  with  Moses ;  we  do  not  wish  to  see  or  hear  Moses,  for  Moses 
was  given  to  the  Jews,  not  to  us  Gentiles  and  Christians,  we  have  our  Gospel 
and  New  Testament ;  they  wish  to  make  Jews  of  us  through  Moses,  but  they 
shall  not." — IVerke,  Walch's  Ed.,  XX.,  203). 

Melanchton  (Loci  Communes,  istEd.,  by  Augusti,  p.  127)  declares,  that  "it 
must  be  admitted  that  the  Decalogue  is  abrogated." 

t  Among  some  theses  published  anonymously  at  Wittenberg  by  Agricola,  is 
the  following:  "Art  thou  steeped  in  sin — an  adulterer,  or  a  thief?  If  thou  be- 
lievest,  thou  art  in  salvation.  All  who  follow  Moses  must  go  to  the  devil;  to 
the  gallows  with  Moses." 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  209 

those  who  believed  to  indulge  their  carnal  desires,  since  those  who 
were  saved  by  grace  were  made  free  from  the  law.' 

In  I^ngland,  under  the  Protectorate  of  Cromwell,  Antinomianism 
took  a  still  more  positive  form,  as  a  legitimate  fruit  of  extreme  Cal- 
vinism. It  was  taught  by  Saltmarsh,  one  of  Cromwell's  chaplains, 
and  by  Dr.  Crisp,  an  ultra-Calvinist,  that  "the  law  is  tyrannical  and 
cruel,  requiring  what  is  naturally  impossible;"  and  that  "repentance 
and  confession  of  sin  are  not  necessary  to  forgiveness."  The  same 
errors  manifested  themselves  again  in  the  eighteenth  century,  about 
the  time  of  the  Wesleyan  revival,  when,  both  in  the  Established 
Church  and  in  the  Dissenting  Churches,  the  doctrine  that  believers 
owe  no  duty  of  obedience  to  the  law  of  God,  was  carried  to  its 
highest  pitch  of  folly.  Orme,  in  his  "  Life  of  Baxter','  pithily  char- 
acterizes and  condemns  this  fatal  error:  "So  far  from  regarding  the 
moral  cure  of  human  nature  as  the  great  object  and  design  of  the 
gospel,  Antinomianism  does  not  take  it  in  at  all,  but  as  it  exists  in 
Christ,  and  becomes  ours  by  a  figure  of  speech.  It  regards  the 
grace  and  the  pardon  as  everything:  the  spiritual  design,  or  effect, 
as  nothing.  Hence  its  opposition  to  progressive,  and  its  zeal  for 
imputed,  sanctification :  the  former  is  intelligible  and  tangible,  but 
the  latter  a  mere  figment  of  the  imagination.  *  *  *  j^  boasts 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  perseverance  of  the  saints,  while  it  believes  in 
no  saint  but  one,  that  is  Jesus,  and  neglects  to  persevere."*  In 
short,  it  is  the  old  folly,  come  to  life  again,  that  James  once  slew 
when  he  said,  "Even  so  faith,  if  it  hath  not  works,  is  dead,  being 
alone." 

A  milder,  but  equally  unscriptural  and  irrational  error,  was  one 
that  Chalmers  felt  keenly  in  his  own  ministry,  viz.:  that  holiness  is 
to  be  valued  "chiefly  as  an  evidence  of  justifying  faith."  He  saj's, 
in  a  strain  the  like  of  which  brought  the  scourge  of  Scotch  Ortho- 
doxy upon  his  back  with  stinging  force,  "  it  is,  in  fact,  chiefly  valuable 
on  its  oii'H  account.  It  forms  part,  and  an  effective  part,  of  salvation. 
Christ  came  to  give  us  a  justifying  righteousness,  and  he  also  came 
to  make  us  holy — not  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  evidencing  here 
our  possession  of  a  justifying  righteousness — but  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  and   fitting   us   for   a   blessed  eternity."t       On  the  publi- 

*See,  for  a  fuller  account  of  this  subject,  the  excellent  article,  "Antinomian- 
ism," in  McClintock  and  Strong's  Cyclopsdia,  from  which  I  have  drawn  the 
material  above. 

fHanna's  Memoir  of  Chalmers,  \'oI.  II.,  p.  191. 


2IO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

cation  of  his  Kilmany  Address,  in  which  he  exhorted  his  former 
parishioners  to  the  practice  of  goodness,  as  in  itself  right  and  obh- 
gatory,  because  willed  by  God,  he  was  denounced  by  the  stiff  ortho- 
doxy as  "  a  sinner  yet  to  be  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."* 
This  in  1815.  So  tenaciously  has  the  horror  of  good  works,  that 
followed  on  the  recoil  from  the  errors  of  Rome,  clung  to  the  Re- 
formed Churches. t 

The  error  of  Antinomianism  was,  at  root,  the  error  of  that  from 
which  it  was  the  extreme  recoil,  the  error  of  Rome,  putting  the 
matter  of  pardon  and  safety  so  much  in  the  foreground,  as  to  fill  all 
the  horizon  of  the  gospel.  "What  shall  I  do  that  I  may  inherit 
eternal  life?"  "  If  thou  wilt  enter  into  life,  keep  the  command- 
ments," answered  Rome,  and  so  degraded  holiness  to  be  merchan- 
dise, a  spiritual  quid  pro  quo.  "  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?" 
"  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,"  for 
"we  conclude  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith  without  the  deeds  of 
the  law,"  said  Antinomianism,  and  so  thrust  practical  holiness  out 
of  doors.  But  the  truth  is,  good  works  have  nothing  to  do  with 
salvation,  one  way  or  the  other.  We  are  saved  freely  by  grace,  and 
the  obligation  to  good  works  is  not  on  the  ground  of  price,  but 
the  necessity  of  right ;  what  theologians  call  iieccssitas  justitice.  And 
good  works  are  good,  not  because  they  save,  or  evidence  faith,  or 
comfort  the  believer,  or  any  such-  thing;  but  simply  because  they 
are  a  part  of  the  moral  perfection  of  the  universe,  and  according  to 
God's  will.  If  the  Antinomians  had  thought  more  of  pleasing  God, 
and  less  of  saving  their  souls,  they  would  never  have  fallen  into  the 
mire,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  road  from  the  ditch  where  Rome 
lay. 

The  Confession  cut  the  ground  from  under  all  this  class  of  error- 
ists,  by  conceding,  at  once,  that  those  who  are  saved  by  grace  are 
under  no  legal  obligation  to  do  good  works,  "  not  in  the  expecta- 
tion of  thereby  meriting  justification  before  him,"  and  then  setting 
forth  into  the  light  the  incontrovertible  truth,  that  we  ought  to  do 
God's  will,  whether  we  be  saved  or  not.     The  law  of  right  is  eternal 

*Hanna's  Memoir  of  Chalmers,  Vol.  II.,  Appendix  A,  p.  491. 

■}■  For  a  racy  exhibition  of  the  follies  with  which  this  suspicion  of  "  good  works" 
has  plagued  much  of  Protestant  and,  more  especially,  Calvinistic  theology,  see 
Henry  Ward  Beecher's  Sermon,  "A  Plea  for  Good  IVor^s." — Plymouth  Pulpit, 
Vol.  v.,  No.  21. 


NEW    OBEDIENCE,  211 

and  immutable,  in  Heaven  and  Earth  and  Hell.  "  It  is  our  duty  to 
perform  those  good  works  which  God  has  commanded,"  whether 
we  be  elect  or  non-elect,  saved  or  lost,  simply  "  because  it  is  his 
will."  This  is  the  duty  of  angels,  fiends,  and  men  alike,  and  none 
the  less  a  ground  of  obligation  though  we  be  no  more  debtors  to 
the  law  for  salvation.  The  law  expressed  in  "  it  is  God's  will,"  is 
not  statutory,  but  fundamental,  the  constitutional  law  of  God's 
kingdom,  and  not  to  be  repealed  or  set  aside. 

This  is  set  forth  in  the  decisive  testimony  of  this  Article:  " //  is 
our  duty,  etc!'  It  is  true  there  was  a  period,  not  yet  wholly  passed 
away  in  all  parts  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  in  which  a  dead  orthodoxy 
made  null  and  void  this  fundamental  teaching  of  the  Confession.  In 
the  seventeenth  century,  when  the  power  of  the  divine  life  was  stifled 
and  overwhelmed  by  ecclesiasticism,  until  it  made  its  way  to  the 
light  again,  in  the  somewhat  distorted  but  living  form  of  Pietism,  this 
Article  was  thrust  into  a  corner.  But  it  still  stood  on  the  record,  a 
part  of  the  common  Confession.  And  it  has  not  been  the  least  of 
the  fruits  of  the  new  development  of  our  Church  in  this  country, 
that  the  churches  of  the  General  Synod  have  declared,  with  a  fresher 
and  ever  deepening  emphasis,  " //«.$■ /<:?////  viitst  bring  fortJi  good 
fruits,  and  that  it  is  our  duty  to  pofonn  those  good  tvorks  which  God 
has  commanded,  because  it  is  his  zvill.'"  The  answer  to  all  Anti- 
nomianism,  theoretical  or  practical,  is  found  in  these  strong  words 
of  the  Confession,  "  it  is  God's  will." 

We  turn  to  notice  the  perversion  of  the  truth,  concerning  the 
obligation  to  right  living,  in  another  direction — a  perversion  made 
by  men  by  no  means  famed  for  their  religion.  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold, 
a  poet  and  critic  of  no  mean  order,  has  been  preaching,  for  the  last 
few  years,  a  new  gospel,  the  gospel  of  culture.  "  The  aim  of  cul- 
ture," to  use  another's  words,  "  is  the  perfection  of  our  human  nature 
on  ail  its  sides,  in  all  its  capacities."*  And  not  only  to  secure  this 
for  our  own  individual  human  nature,  but  also  for  the  sum-total  of 
humanity  wi.th  which  we  stand  inseparably  connected.     In  words 

*  I  have  used,  in  this  part  of  my  subject,  the  thoughts,  and  sometimes  the 
words,  ol  Principal  Shairp,  of  the  United  College  of  St.  Salvator  and  St.  Leon- 
ard, St.  Andrews,  whose  little  book,  "  Culture  and  Religion  in  some  of  their  Re- 
lations," I  could  wish  th;\t  every  minister  and  moral  and  spiritual  teacher  might 
read  and  ponder.  Nothing  sweeter,  simpler,  or  truer  has  been  written  on  this 
theme. 


2  I  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

borrowed  from  Bishop  Wilson,  but  made,  by  his  fehcitous  choice 
and  application,  Mr.  Arnold's  own,  its  purpose  is  "  to  make  reason 
and  the  kingdom  of  God  prevail."  This  aim  seems  coincident  with 
that  of  religion.  But  Mr.  Arnold  and  his  following  teach  that  re- 
ligion is  only  one  of  many  factors  to  be  used  in  working  out  the 
processes  of  culture.  To  secure  his  aim,  he  would  summon  to  his 
aid  all  the  help  that  science,  religion,  poetry,  philosophy  and  history 
can  afford.  Religion,  then,  is  only  one  of  the  servants  of  this  new 
goddess.  We  are  to  seek  God,  not  for  himself,  but  for  ourselves; 
a  position  destructive  to  the  very  essence  of  religion.  We  are  to 
follow  holiness,  and  practice  right  living,  not  as  ends  of  blessedness, 
and  good  sufficient  in  themselves,  not  "  because  it  is  the  will  of 
God;"  but  because  we  must  practice  good  in  order  to  secure  per- 
fection in  ourselves.  God  and  goodness  are  to  serve  as  priests  at 
this  new  altar  of  "  human  perfection."  Mr.  Arnold  and  his  school 
would  land  us,  practically,  not  far  from  the  communion  of  the  Comt- 
ists,  who  are  engaged,  at  present,  in  the  "  worship  of  humanity." 

Seek  and  practice  the  purest  goodness,  say  the  advocates  of  cul- 
ture, for,  in  so  doing,  you  will  find  an  instrument  for  self-culture. 
Do  good  works,  for  so  you  will  best  secure  the  ends  of  personal 
elevation.  But  we  are  met  here  by  that  well-known  law  in  ethics, 
which,  from  his  happy  expression  of  it,  it  has  been  proposed  to  call 
after  Dr.  Newman:  "All  virtue  and  goodness  tend  to  make  men 
powerful  in  this  world;  but  they  who  aim  at  the  power  have  not  the 
virtue.  Again :  Virtue  is  its  own  reward,  and  brings  with  it  the 
truest  and  highest  pleasures:  but  they  who  cultivate  it  for  the 
pleasure-sake,  are  selfish,  not  religious,  and  will  never  gain  the 
pleasure,  because  they  can  never  have  the  virtue."  Now  what 
more,  according  to  this  law,  is  the  ground  of  obligation  to  right  liv- 
ing, set  forth  by  the  culturists,  than  a  refined  species  of  selfishness? 
If  they  are  selfish,  "who  cultivate  virtue  for  the  pleasure-sake," 
snrely  they  are  no  less,  who  cultivate  virtue  because  virtue  brings 
elevation  and  breadth  of  life.  If  they  "  who  cultivate  virtue  for  the 
pleasure-sake  *  *  will  never  gain  the  pleasure,  because  they  can 
never  have  the  virtue,"  then  surely  they  who  perform  good  works 
for  the  culture-sake,  will  never  have  that  fine,  essential  soul  of  un- 
questioning obedience  to  God,  without  which  good  works  are  not 
good,  but  bad. 

Above  all  these  subtle  delusions   and  by-ways,  through  which 


NEW    OBEDIENCE.  21  3 

men  propose  to  allure  their  unwilling  fellows  to  the  practice  of 
goodness,  stands  the  firm  unfailing  pillar  of  obligation  set  up  in  this 
Article  :  "  It  is  our  duty  to  do  those  good  works  which  God  has  com- 
niandcd,  because  it  is  his  zvill." 

We  are  to  seek  God  for  himself  We  are  to  seek  goodness  and 
practice  holiness,  for  his  sake,  who  is  goodness  itself  This  imports 
into  the  practice  of  virtue  the  one  element  of  life,  lacking  which  all 
the  noble  moralities  and  aspirations  of  the  pagan  world  withered 
and  trailed  fruitless  in  the  dust,  the  sense  of  personal  allegiance  and 
loyalty  to  a  superior.  This  makes  the  command  of  Christ  a  living 
word,  springing  up  into  unfailing  streams  of  goodness  in  the  life. 
It  is  the  command  of  my  Lord  and  Master.  This  satisfies  not  only 
the  conscience  clamoring  for  the  right,  not  only  the  aspirations  that 
look  for  a  better,  even  a  perfect  way,  but  also  the  hunger  of  the 
heart  that  cries  for  love,  and  nourishes  itself  by  the  services  of  love. 
Nay,  it  goes  deeper  still ;  it  fills  and  completes  that  spiritual  desire 
after  God,  the  Adorable,  the  Father  of  our  spirits,  which  "  thirsteth 
for  God,"  which  "  crieth  out  for  the  living  God  ;  *  *  when  shall 
I  come  and  appear  before  God  ?  " 

Thus,  at  last,  doctrine  fuses  into  doctrine,  till  the  circle  of  the 
divine  life  is  complete.  Faith  and  works,  instead  of  standing  over 
against  each  other  in  irreconcilable  contradiction,  melt  into  each  other 
and  embrace.     "  This  faith  must  bring  forth  good  fruits." 

We  have  completed  our  imperfect  survey  of  this  cardinal  truth. 
We  have  found  the  necessity  of  holy  living  to  be  a  doctrine  of  nat- 
ural reason,  as  well  as  of  revealed  truth.  We  have  shown  that  New 
Obedience  has  its  source  in  the  spontaneous  outflow  of  a  living 
faith.  We  have  seen  that  the  true  ground  of  obligation  to  right 
living  is  to  be  found  in  the  imperative  of  conscience,  not  in  the 
meritorious  value  of  good  works  ;  and  in  the  will  of  God,  rather  than 
in  the  excellent  results  of  virtue.  Lastly,  we  have  noticed  how  this 
ground  of  obligation  corrects  the  errors  of  a  contemptuous  disre- 
gard of  the  works  of  the  law,  and  of  a  degradation  of  holy  living 
to  be  only  the  means  of  self-culture. 

The  appeal  made  by  this  Article,  is  to  the  practical  life  of  the  be- 
liever. It  is  the  Article  of  the  market  and  the  shop,  the  street  and 
the  home.  It  prescribes  the  dress  that  religion  shall  wear  when  she 
goes  abroad  among  men.  Faith  is  a  sacred  and  hidden  thing,  not 
to  be  worn  like  a  jewel  on  one's  cap,  but  treasured  in  seclusion. 
15 


214  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

But  '^  this  faith  imist  bring  forth  goodfruitsl'  and  so  "adorn  the  doc- 
trine of  God  our  Saviour  in  all  things."  It  echoes  the  preaching  of 
John  :  "  Bring  forth,  therefore,  fruits  meet  for  repentance."  It  re- 
iterates the  warning  of  James :  "  Faith  without  works  is  dead." 


ARTICLE  VII. 


THE  CHURCH. 

By  J.  G,  MORRIS,  D.  D.,  LL.  D. 


"They  likewise  teach  that  there  always  will  be  one  holy  Church.  But  the 
Church  is  the  congregation  of  the  saints,  in  which  the  gospel  is  correctly 
taught  and  the  sacraments  are  properly  administered.  And  for  the  true  unity 
of  the  Church,  it  is  sufficient  to  agree  concerning  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel 
and  the  administration  of  the  sacraments.  Nor  is  it  necessary  that  the  same 
human  traditions,  that  is,  rites  and  ceremonies  instituted  by  men,  should  be 
everywhere  observed.  As  Payl  says,  '  One  body,  one  Spirit,  even  as  ye  are 
called  in  hope  of  your  calling ;  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of 
all,'  etc." 

FOR  a  full  and  complete  illustration  of  what  the  Confession  teaches 
.  concerning  the  Church,  the  Eighth  Article  should  also  be  in- 
cluded, for  both  are  inseparably  connected.  They  treat  one  theme 
viewed  from  two  different  points.  The  Seventh  embraces  principally 
the  mtema/ side,  ■whilst  the  other  contemplates  the  Church  in  her 
external  aspect ;  and  yet  not  so  that  either  Article  exclusively  con- 
siders these  different  aspects,  for  the  spirit  and  body  of  the  one 
living  organism  of  the  Church  cannot  be  separated.* 

In  illustrating  this  subject,  I  shall  pursue  the  train  of  ideas  as  laid 
down  by  the  Confessors,  without  any  other  artificial  divisions,  ex- 

*The  fact  is,  that  for  a  perfect  exposition  of  the  teachings  of  the  Confession 
on  the  Church,  Arts.  VIII,  and  XXVIII.,  and  then  Arts.  XIJ.  and  XV..  and 
secondarily  Art§.  XI.  and  XIII.,  in  connection  with  the  authentic  expositions  of 
the  Apology,  should  all  be  considered,  and  hence  it  is  simply  absurd  to  expect 
that  anything  like  full  justice  should  be  done  to  this  subject  in  a  lecture  of  the 
usual  length. 

For  the  fullest  bibliography  of  the  Confession  most  easily  accessible  to  most 
of  our  ministers,  see  Krauth's  "Conservative  Reformation,"  p.  2cx3,  seq. 


21  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

cept  such  as  may  be  absolutely  necessary.     They  are  natural  and 
logical,  and  could  not  be  improved. 

This  Article  follows  the  preceding  in  regular  gospel  order.  After 
they  have  shown  that  man  is  justified  by  faith  alone,  without  works 
— that  this  faith  is  ordinarily  attained  only  through  the  preaching 
of  the  word,  and  the  use  of  the  sacraments — this  Article,  concerning 
the  Church,  now  follows  very  appropriately,  for  it  shows  the  place 
where  this  word  is  taught  and  these  sacraments  administered.  It 
is  not  enough  for  the  sick  man  to  know  by  what  remedies  he  may 
be  healed.  He  must  know  where  they  may  be  found.  Besides 
this,  the  controversy  between  the  papists  and  our  theologians  on 
this  subject  was  violent.  The  question  was  not  only.  Where  was 
the  Church  before  the  Reformation  ?  but  especially.  What  were  the 
marks  of  the  true  Church?  and  these  questions  Arts.  VII.  and  VIII. 
abundantly  answer. 

The  first  grand  point  is  the  undisputed  assertion  that  there  will 
be  a  ClinrcJi  characterized  by  certain  distinctive  scriptural  marks. 

The  word  church  (e/c/cAr/a/a)^  in  general,  means  an  assembly  or  con- 
gregation, without  any  regard  to  the  character  of  the  persons  com- 
posing it.  It  is  even  once  (Acts  xix.  32)  applied  to  a  tumultuous 
mob  of  rioters.  But  that  the  use  of  the  word  might  be  distin- 
guished from  its  application  to  the  assembly  of  these  disturbers  of 
the  public  peace,  the  institution  spoken  of  in  the  Confession  is  called 
the  Church  or  assembly  or  congregation  of  God.  Acts  xx.  28: 
"  Take  heed  *  *  to  feed  the  Church  of  God."  See  also  i  Cor. 
X.  32;  xi.  16,  22;  XV.  9;  2  Cor.  x;  Gal.  i.  13;  i  Thes.s.  ii.  14;  2 
Thess.  i.  4 ;  I  Tim.  iii.  5,  15.  In  this  sense  the  word  is  also  used  of 
a  single  congregation  of  Christians,  as  a  particular  place — a  local 
church.  Matt,  xviii.  17:  Acts  viii.  i;  ix.  31;  i  Cor.  i.  2 ;  Col. 
iv.  16.  It  is  also  used  as  embracing  the  aggregate  of  the  con- 
fessors of  Christ  upon  earth — "Church  of  God,"  i  Cor.  x.  32;  xi. 
22;  I  Tim.  iii.  15 — "  Church  of  Christ,"  Matt.  xvi.  18;  comp.  Ephes. 
i.  22,  V.  23,  etc.;  and  sometimes  "church"  absolutely,  i  Cor.  vi.  4; 
xii.  28;  Col.  i.  18;  Heb.  xii.  23.  But  as  heretics  may  claim  mem- 
bership in  the  Church,  and  boast  of  their  privileges 'for  the  honor 
and  distinction  derived  from  them,  the  true  Church  is  here  desig- 
nated as  the  Church  of  the  saints,  i  Cor.  xiv.  33,  in  opposition  to 
what  the  Psalmist,  xxvi.  5,  calls  the  "congregation  of  evil-doers," 
and  Rev.  ii.  9,  "the  synagogue  of  Satan." 


THE    CHURCH.  2  1 7 

That  institution,  then,  which  consists  of  a  number  of  persons 
wherever  they  may  H\'e,  professing  certain  specific  reh'gious  doc- 
trines taught  in  the  Scriptures,  who  are  governed  by  divinely  estab- 
lished laws,  acknowledging  one  supreme  divine  head,  practicing 
certain  rites  and  ceremonies  not  necessarily  everywhere  the  same, 
cultivating  mutual  good  will  and  harmony,  aiming  to  promote  the 
glory  of  their  invisible  but  ever-present  Head — that  institution  is  a 
Church  or  congregation  of  saints,  which  the  Confessors  declare  shall 
and  must  continue  forever. 

But  the  Confession  proceeds  to  specify  some  important  peculiari- 
ties of  this  institution,  by  which  it  is  distinguished  from  all  other 
assemblies  or  congregations  in  the  world.  It  has  certain  broad  and 
deeply  marked  features,  by  which  any  man  can  tell  its  origin,  design, 
destiny,  and  the  presumed  character  of  its  members,  thus  making  a 
wide  distinction  between  it  and  any  other  association  established 
upon  earth. 

It  is  a  holy  Church — a  congregation  that  is  to  be  separate  from 
sinners — which  exercises  itself  in  holiness,  that  conforms  its  life  to 
the  faith  and  commands  of  God;  "a  chosen  generation,  zealous  of 
good  works."  1  Pet.  ii.  9.  Her  God  is  holy  who  gathers  her;  her 
Saviour,  to  whom  she  is  betrothed,  is  holy;  the  Spirit,  who  enlight- 
ens and  rules  her,  is  holy;  the  means  of  grace  she  emplo}'s  are  holy; 
the  service  she  renders  to  the  Lord  is  holy.  Her  exalted  Head  is 
holy.  Heb.  vii.  26.  He  makes  her  the  participant  of  his  holiness. 
John  xvii.  19.  She  is  called  with  a  holy  calling  and  separate  from 
the  world.  2  Tim.  i.  19.  The  word  of  God  entrusted  to  her  is  holy. 
Rom.  iii.  2. 

It  is  a  Christian  Church.  {German  copy)  Christ  is  the  Head  of 
the  Church,  Col.  i.  18;  Ephes.  i.  22.  It  is  the  kingdom  which  he 
governs,  and  he  has  not  committed  or  transferred  his  sovereignty  to 
another.  This  Church  professes  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  Ephes.  ii. 
20  ;  it  is  built  upon  the  foundation  of  Christ  and  the  apostles — Christ 
bought  the  Church  with  his  own  blood,  Acts  xx.  28  ;    l  Pet.  ii.  9. 

The  Church  is  the  body  of  Christ,  Rom.  xii.  5;  I  Cor.  x.  17;  xii. 
27.     Sec  this  figure  beautifully  illustrated  in  I  Cor.  xii.  7,  scq. 

She  is  called  the  shecpfold  of  Christ,  John  x.  I,  27,  28,  and  the 
spouse  of  Christ,  John  iii.  29;  2  Cor.  xi.  2  ;   Rev.  xxi.  9. 

It  is  not  a  yczvish  Church,  for  Christ  calls  it  "my  Church,''  Matt, 
xvi.  18.  Paul  (Rom.  xvi.  16)  says,  "  the  churches  of  Christ  salute 
you." 


2l8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

It  is  not  a  Mohammedan  church,  "for  that  is  a  synagogue  of 
Satan,"  from  which  the  "Church  of  Christ"  is  to  "  separate  herself " 

It  is  not  a  national  ox  local  church,  for  it  is  destined  to  be  univer- 
sal— "the  ends  of  the  earth  shall  see  the  salvation  of  God,"  and  "of 
his  kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end."  It  is  composed  of  people  in 
every  region  of  the  earth,  and  in  different  periods,  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  world  to  the  end  of  it,  there  has  been,  and  always  will 
be,  an  assembly  of  believers. 

There  must  be  one  and  only  one  Church,  because  she  is  brought 
by  one  God,  through  one  baptism,  into  one  mystical  body  under  one 
head ;  she  is  ruled  by  one  Spirit  and  compacted  in  the  unity  of  faith, 
hope  and  love.  (Eph.  iv.  15.)  She  professes  one  faith,  and  is  called 
by  one  calling  to  one  celestial  inheritance.  She  does  not  recognize 
several  assemblies  of  the  same  species  existing  simultaneously,  for 
the  Church  is  the  one  assembly  of  all  believers  united  to  their  Head 
by  faith  ;  she  does  not  recognize  any  successive  Church,  for  the  whole 
never  perished,  nor  will  ever  perish,  but  has  endured  from  the  be- 
ginning, by  a  perpetual  succession  of  believers,  down  to  our  times, 
and  will  endure  perpetually  ;  for  Christ  is  the  eternal  King,  and  the 
Church  is  his  ever  continuing  spouse.  He  will  always  gather  to 
himself  out  of  the  human  family  an  assembly  of  saints,  whom  he  will 
cherish,  love  and  defend  as  his  spouse.  Matt.  xvi.  18;  Luke  i.  33  ;  i 
Tim.  iii.  15. 

The  Church  shall  continue  forever.  "  There  always  Ivill  be  one 
holy  Christian  Church."  "  The  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it,"  Matt.  xvi.  18.  In  this  phrase  of  the  Confession  the  very 
close  connection  between  the  Church  militant  on  earth,  and  the 
Church  triumpJia)it  in  heaven,  is  set  forth.  Gal.  iv.  26;  Heb.  xii.  23  ; 
xiii.  14;  Phil.  iii.  20 ;  and  the  vocation  or  business  of  the  first  to 
gather  souls  to  the  end  of  time  for  the  perfected  congregation  of 
Christ  in  the  life  to  come,  is  impressively  indicated ;  see  Matt.  xxiv. 
14  :  Acts  i.  7,  8.  These  words  intimate  "  that  however  furious  the 
assaults  of  the  powers  of  hell  may  be  here  below,  they  will  never  be 
able  to  overthrow  neither  the  Church  of  Christ  nor  even  one  single 
true  foundation  stone  ;  never,  as  surely  as  he  who  spoke  that  word. 
Matt.  xvi.  18,  was  not  2.  fanatic,  but  a  Son  of  the  living  God."^ 

Our  theologians  have  given  this  Church  several  other  distinguish- 
ing characteristics. 

*Tholuck's  Sermons,  p.  121. 


THE    CHURCH.  219 

She  is  called  catholic,  in  order,  as  the  Apology,  IV.  says,  to  prevent 
any  one  from  thinking  that  tlie  Church  is  an  external  polity  or  gov- 
ernment of  certain  nations,  confined  to  any  particular  country,  king- 
dom or  state,  as  Rome  would  have  it,  but  *  *  the  true  Church 
consists  of  those  persons  scattered  all  over  the  world,  who  sincerely 
believe  in  Christ,  who  have  one  Gospel,  one  Christ,  one  baptism  and 
one  holy  Supper;  who  are  ruled  by  one  Spirit,  even  if  they  observe 
dissimilar  ceremonies."  She  is  called  catholic  ['^a^^'^ov,  according  to 
the  whole  or  universal)  because  she  professes  that  faith  which  the 
true  or  universal  Church  all  over  the  world  has  always  professed. 
She  is  not  like  the  Old  Testament  Church,  consisting  exclusively  of 
a  particular  nation,  confined  to  a  particular  territory,  but  is  com- 
posed of  believers  of  all  nations  in  all  the  world. 

She  is  called  apostolic,  partly  because  she  was  planted  by  the  apos- 
tles, and  partly  because  she  embraces  the  doctrine  of  salvation  de- 
livered by  the  apostles  and  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles 
and  prophets,  Ephes.  ii.  xx.* 

She  is  called  the  Church  militant,  because  under  the  banner  of 
Christ  she  yet  fights  against  Satan,  the  world  and  the  flesh  in  this 
life. 

She  is  called  the  Church  trimnphant,  because,  transferred  to  her 
heavenly  rest,  she  will  be  free  from  the  labor  of  fighting  and  the 
peril  of  succumbing,  and  will  triumph  in  heaven  over  the  powers 
opposed  to  her.  Rev.  ii.  10;  iv.  4;  vi.  12. 

Our  theologians  also  say  that  a  pure  or  true  Church  is  that  con- 
gregation or  society  of  men  in  which  all  things  necessary  to  be 
believed  in  order  to  salvation,  and  to  be  done  in  order  to  holiness  of 
hfe,  are  taught  from  the  word  of  God  without  any  admixture  of 
hurtful  errors,  in  which  the  sacraments  are  administered  according 
to  the  institution  of  Christ,  and  thus  spiritual  children  of  God  are 
begotten  who  are  joined  by  this  true  faith  to  Christ,  the  Head,  and 
constitute  one  body  m  him. 

A  false  or  corrupt  church  is  that  society  of  men  in  which  are 
taught  the  doctrines  of  faith  from  the  word  of  God,  but  mixed  with 

*None  of  the  four  predicates  of  which  Rome  proudly  boasts  as  peculiar  to  her 
Church,  fail  in  our  Confession  ;  neither  the  nntiy,  nor  sanctity,  nor  catholicity, 
nor  apostolicity.  In  the  first  two,  which  alone  the  Augustana  expressly  men- 
tions, the  others  are  included  ;  but  Rome  uses  these  four  predicates  in  quite  an- 
other and  erroneous  sense,  which  my  limits  will  not  permit  me  to  explain. 


2  20  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

false  and  corrupting  errors,  and  in  which  the  sacraments  are  indeed 
administered,  but  not  in  the  way  nor  with  the  end  in  view  for  which 
they  were  instituted  by  Christ. 

They  charitably  add  that  by  this  is  not  meant  that  no  one  in  such 
a  church  may  be  saved,  for  the  word  of  God  is  still  preached  in  it, 
and  they  propose  this  syllogism:  In  whatever  church  the  word  of 
God  is  publicly  preached  and  the  sacraments  administered  in  a  way 
substantially  correct,  in  it  spiritual  sons  and  heirs  of  eternal  life  may 
be  born;  but  in  certain  corrupt  churches,  such  as  the  Roman  and 
Greek,  the  word  of  God  is  publicly  preached,  therefore,  in  them, 
men  may  be  converted  and  saved. 

The  phrase  "  exti'a  ecclesiam  nulla  salus^'  is  recognized  by  our 
Church,  but  it  does  not  precisely  exclude  the  members  of  other  ec- 
clesiastical communions  from  the  hope  of  salvation,  because  men 
may  be  regenerated  in  such  communions.  Hence  it  is  not  under- 
stood by  us  as  it  is  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  theologically 
denies  salvation  to  all  who  belong  to  other  communions.  By  this 
phrase,  our  Church  means  only  that  he  who  desires  to  be  certain  of 
his  salvation  must  belong  to  the  assembly  of  the  saints,  which  is 
composed  of  believers  all  over  the  world.  Our  theologians  express 
it  thus:  It  is  necessary  that  every  one  who  would  be  saved  should 
be  a  living  member  and  true  citizen  of  the  catholic  and  apostolical 
Church,  and  those  who  are  without  the  Church  are  aliens  from  God, 
from  Christ  and  the  benefits  of  the  heavenly  kingdom  and  the  hope 
of  eternal  life;  and  this  position  they  found  upon  Ephes.  ii.  12,  13  ; 
iv.  16;  V.  8  ;  I  Pet.  ii.  9;  Rev.  xxii.  15  ;  xxi.  8.  The  peculiar  and 
appropriate  benefits  of  the  Church,  such  as  regeneration,  conversion, 
etc.,  are  not  to  be  obtained  outside  of  the  Church,  therefore  there  is 
no  salvation  out  of  the  Church.  Hence,  by  us,  the  phrase  is  reduced 
simply  to  this,  that  no  one  will  be  saved  who  does  not  believe. 

When  the  Article  affirms  that  there  must  and  always  will  be  one, 
holy,  Christian  Church,  we  must  distinguish  between  the  merely 
external  congregation  assembled  for  the  purpose  of  public  worship, 
and  the  Church  in  and  for  herself 

This  external  and  visible  existence  of  a  worshipping  congregation 
is  not  essential  to  the  existence  of  the  Church,  for  in  times  of  per 
secution,  the  assembling  together  of  the  saints  could  not  take  place, . 
as  for  instance  in  the  time  of  Elijah,  i    Kings  xix. ;  the  time  of  the 
Babylonish   captivity,   Ps.   cxxxvii. ;    at    the    time   of  the   death   of 


THE    CHURCH.  22  1 

Christ,  John  xx.  19,  and  at  various  other  periods  in  the  history  of 
the  Church  in  more  recent  times.  The  true  Church  still  exists, 
though  in  some  places  and  times  her  enemies  may  prevent  her  peo- 
ple from  assembling  for  worship. 

The  Article  defines  the  Church  to  be  a  congregation  of  all  saints 
or  believers.  This  celebrated  definition,  it  must  be  observed,  refers 
specially  to  the  Church  in  her  internal  character  or  her  u/ea/  exist- 
ence. It  is  essentially  the  Church  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word 
{ecclesia  stride  dicta,  in  opposition  to  ecclesia  late  dicta ;  comp.  Art. 
VIII.)  Quamquam  eccles.  proprie  sit  congreg.  sanctorum),  the 
Church  as  a  communion  of  true  Christians,  genuine  children  of 
God  in  Christ,  that  is  here  described. 

It  is  a  congregation,  and  hence  does  not  consist  of  one  or  two,  or 
several,  but  of  many,  and,  hence,  called  "  the  people  of  God." 

It  is  a  congregation  not  according  to  the  flesh — a  mere  collection 
of  persons — but  a  congregation  according  to  the  Spirit,  not  at  one 
place,  but  in  all  places,  in  all  sections  of  the  world,  Ps.  1.  i ;  John 
iv.  21  ;    I  Tim.  ii.  8;    I  Pet.  i.  I. 

It  is  a  congregation  of  all  believers,  for  all  who  believe  in  Christ 
constitute  one  body,  of  whom  Christ  is  the  Head  and  all  of  whom 
receive  the  same  spirit,  power  and  life.     Ephes.  i.  23  ;  iv.  4. 

The  internal  and  essential  form  of  the  Church  consists  in  the 
spiritual  union  of  all  true  believers  who,  as  members  of  the  Church, 
are  bound  together  among  themselves  with  Christ  the  Head  by  a 
true  and  living  faith,  which  begets  a  communion  of  mutual  love, 
John  i.  12;  xiii.  33;  Gal.  iii.  27;    i  Cor.  vi.  17. 

"  We  therefore  conclude,"  says  the  Apology,  "according  to  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  that  the  true  Christian  Church  consists  of  those 
persons  throughout  the  world  who  believe  the  gospel  of  Christ  and 
have  the  Holy  Spirit  in  their  hearts;  and  yet  we  acknowledge  also 
that  in  this  state  of  earthly  existence  there  are  associated  with  true 
Christians  many  hypocrites  and  wicked  persons,  who  are  also  mem- 
bers of  the  Church,  in  so  far  as  it  concerns  the  external  signs." 

The  Scriptural  proofs  that  the  Church  is  the  congregation  of 
saints  are  numerous.  She  is  called  the  mystical  body  of  Christ, 
Rom.  xii.  5;  i  Cor.  x.  17;  xii.  27;  Ephes.  i.  23;  Col.  i.  iS;  the 
Church  is  the  mother  of  believers.  Gal.  iv.  26;  the  sons  of  God, 
John  i.  12;  iii.  6;  she  is  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  Rom.  viii.  14;  her 
children  are  the  "heirs  of  Christ,"  Rom.  viii.   17;  the  sheepfold  of 


2  22  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Christ,  John  x.  I,  27,  28;  one  flesh  with  Christ,  Ephes.  v.  30;  the 
house  of  the  Hving  God,  i  Tim.  iii.  15  ;  a  spiritual  house,  I  Pet.  ii. 
5  ;  none  but  Hving  stones  built  upon  the  corner-stone,  Jesus  Christ, 
belong  to  her,  Ephes.  ii.  20.  None  of  these  qualities  are  applicable 
to  unbelievers. 

This,  then,  is  the  character  of  the  Church  in  its  strictest  sense^ 
that  is,  the  congregation  of  believers  exclusively.  There  is  a  wider 
sense  in  which  the  word  must  be  used,  and  it  embraces  the  congre- 
gation of  "  the  called,"  in  which  all  who  by  outward  profession  as- 
semble for  the  hearing  of  the  word  and  the  enjoyment  of  the  sacra- 
ments, are  regarded  as  members.  These  must  be  distinguished 
from  those  who  not  only  outwardly  profess  the  faith,  but  are  en- 
dowed with  true  faith  of  heart  and  the  Spirit  of  regeneration.  The 
following  passages  refer  to  the  Church  in  its  broad  sense:  Acts  xx. 
28;  I  Cor.  xii.  28;  xiv.  4,  23.  The  following  in  its  stricter  sense: 
Matt.  xvi.  18;  Ephes.  i.  22,  23;  v.  23-26;  I  Tim.  iii.  15.  As  John 
Gerhard  says  :  "  The  former  are  the  true  and  living  members  of  the 
Church,  who  draw  life  and  spirit  from  Christ  the  Head;  the  latter 
are  decayed  and  dying  members :  the  former  belong  to  the  Church 
internally;  the  latter,  outwardly:  the  former  by  an  internal  and 
spiritual  connection  with  Christ;  the  latter  by  habit,  profession,  or 
association:  the  former  in  heart,  the  latter  in  word:  those  by  the 
judgment  and  decision  of  God,  these  by  the  judgment  and  decision 
of  men :  those,  with  soul  and  body  equally,  these,  with  the  body 
alone :  those  as  sound  and  wholesome  parts  of  the  body,  these  as 
sores  and  bad  humors  of  the  body." 

We  do  not  say,  there  are  two  churches,  one  the  true  and  inter- 
nal, and  the  other  nominal  and  external,  but  we  affirm  that  there  is 
only  one  and  the  same  Church,  and  that  the  whole  congregation  of 
"the  called  "  are  to  be  viewed  in  a  double  sense:  internal  and  exter- 
nal;  the  external  consisting  of  those  "called"  and  associating  in  a 
profession  of  the  faith  and  use  of  the  sacraments,  and  the  internal 
consisting  equally  of  those  professing  the  faith  and  enjoying  the 
sacraments,  but  at  the  same  time,  and  in  addition,  enjoying  the  grace 
of  regeneration  and  an  internal  association  in  the  bond  of  the  Spirit. 

We  grant  that  hypocrites  and  unholy  persons  belong  to  the  Church 
in  the  sense  of  the  first,  but,  in  respect  to  the  last,  we  contend  that 
believers  or  saints  alone  are  members  of  it.  To  this  let  us  add  what 
the  Apology  says  :  "  We  admit  that  hypocrites  and  wicked  persons 


THE    CHURCH.  223 

may  also  be  members  of  the  Church  in  outward  community  of  name 
and  office,  *  *  *  for  Paul  prophesied  that  Antichrist  would  sit 
in  the  temple  of  God  and  reign  in  the  Church.  *  *  *  The  bad 
are  in  the  Church  only  by  name,  not  by  practice ;  but  the  pious  are 
in  it  both  by  name  and  practice." 

This  difference  has  given  rise  to  the  terms  visible  and  invisible. 
The  visible  Church  is  represented  by  all  who  belong  to  the  external 
Church  without  any  regard  to  their  moral  character,  hence,  embracin'g 
the  pious  and  unbelieving,  the  elect  and  the  reprobate.  The  invisible 
Church  embraces,  of  course,  those  who  belong  to  the  visible  Church, 
but  who  are  distinguished  from  the  unbelieving  and  the  reprobate 
by  a  possession  of  the  true  faith  and  the  spirit  of  God  dwelling  in 
their  hearts.  The  former  are  seen  and  known  of  all  men ;  the  latter, 
though  seen  of  men,  yet  known  as  members  of  the  true  Church 
only  to  God.  We  may  believe  them  to  be  true  Christians,  but 
whether  they  are  really  so,  is  a  fact  concealed  from  us,  that  is,  in- 
visible, Rom.  xi.  28  ;  2  Kings  xix.  10;  Rom.  xi.  3  ;  Heb.  xi.  i. 

These  terms  visible  and  invisible  are  not  used  in  the  Symbolical 
Books,  nor  by  our  earlier  theologians — they  were  first  used  by 
Zwingli — but  the  same  idea  is  expressed  in  the  Apology: 

"The  Church  does  not,  however,  consist,"  says  the  Apology, 
"only  in  a  system  of  external  things  and  rites,  but  chiefly  in  an  in- 
ternal communiQn  of  heavenly  graces,  such  as  the  blessings  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  faith  and  the  love  of  God,"  and  this  Church  is  called 
the  body  of  Christ,  which  he  renews,  sanctifies  and  governs  by  his 
Spirit.  Although  wicked  hypocrites  have  fellowship  with  the  true 
Church,  according  to  external  name  and  office,  yet  when  the  Church 
is  strictly  defined,  we  must  affirm  that  it  consists  of  those  who  are 
the  body  of  Christ,  which  is  in  name  and  fact  the  Church. 

The  "  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  its  purity  and  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments  according  to  the  Gospel,"  are  regarded  by  the 
Confessors  as  distinguishing  marks  of  the  true  Church. 

The  preaching  of  the  Gospel  was  one  of  the  grand  institutions 
which  the  Reformation  re-established.  It  had  fallen  into  disuse  for 
some  centuries  before  that  period,  and  even  now  is  regarded  as  of 
secondary  importance  in  the  public  service  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

But  these,  in  and  of  themselves,  are  not  marks  of  the  true  Church 
of  the  elect,  for  in  all  churches  in  which  the  Gospel  is  preached  in 
its  purity,  and  the  sacraments  rightly  administered,  there  are  still 


2  24  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

some  unbelievers  or  unconverted  men  ;  which  was  the  case  even  in 
apostolic  times,  as  the  New  Testament  abundantly  shows,  Rom.  ix, 
6,  7,  8,  and  still  it  is  true  that  where  these  marks  are  visible  there  the 
true  Church  exists,  for  there  are  always  some  who  are  faithful  to 
Christ ;  they  are  of  one  mind  with  Christ,  and  are  members  of  the 
true  Church,  because  the  proper  preaching  of  the  word,  and  the 
right  use  of  the  sacraments,  will  always  produce  their  legitimate 
fruits,  2  Tim.  ii.  19  ;  Is.  Iv.  10  scq.\  Mark  xvi.  15  ;  John  vi.  31. 

Our  theologians  are  very  exact  in  their  definitions  on  this  part  of 
the  Article.  I  quoted  one  or  two  under  the  head  of  a  "  pure  and  cor- 
rupt church,"  and  I  will  here  quote  still  further  from  Gerhard:  "By 
the  word  of  God  and  the  use  of  the  sacraments,  the  Church  is  ex- 
hibited, collected,  nourished  and  preserved.  There  the  word  and 
use  of  the  sacraments  are  the  proper,  genuine  and  infallible  marks  of 
the  Church,  and,  consequently,  where  they  are  pure  the  Church  is 
pure." 

When  the  pure  preaching  of  the  word  is  set  forth  as  a  mark  of 
the  true  Church,  the  word  p7'eaching  is  used  in  a  general  sense  for 
the  common  profession  of  the  doctrine  by  all  the  members,  pastors 
and  hearers,  and  for  the  public  reading  of  the  Scriptures  in  the 
Church,  which  also  is  a  species  of  preaching.  Acts  xv.  21.  The 
purity  or  impurity  of  the  doctrine  must  be  recognized  from  the 
symbols  and  public  confessions  set  forth  in  the  n^iie  of  the  whole 
Church,  and  not  from  the  opinions  or  writings  of  any  individual  the- 
ologian. Hollaz  says  very  properly,  "  that  preaching  by  the  pastor 
as  his  own  appropriate  act  or  duty  is  not  absolutely  necessary  to  the 
existence  of  the  Church,  as  the  times  of  several  persecutions  show, 
in  which,  by  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  alone,  without  the  public 
preaching  of  the  pure  doctrine,  the  Church  was  preserved." 

The  whole  meaning  of  the  phrase  "  among  whom  the  Gospel  is 
preached  in  its  purity,"  is  apparent,  when  it  is  remembered  that  in 
the  early  Reformation  times  it  was  held  to  consist  principally  of  a 
scriptural  representation  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith. 
That  was  the  right  preaching  of  the  Gospel  then,  and  it  is  so  now. 
Where  that  doctrine  is  held  forth  in  its  scriptural  purity,  all  other 
fundamental  doctrines  will  be  maintained  with  equal  scriptural  cor- 
rectness. 

By  the  "  scriptural  administration  of  the  sacraments"  was  meant 
the  rejection  of  all  superadded  sacraments  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  as 


THE    CHURCH.  225 

well  as  of  her  unscriptural  ceremonies  associated  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  two  Gospel  sacraments — the  denial  of  the  cup  to  the 
laity,  and  the  other  Romish  inventions.  There  is  no  allusion  to  any 
specific  mode  or  form  of  administration,  nor  is  any  recommended. 
These  modes  have  varied  always,  but  the  idea,  design  and  purpose 
of  them  are  to  be  maintained,  whatever  may  be  the  outward  mode  of 
administration. 

Those  who  would  change  what  the  universal  Church  has  decreed 
as  essential  to  their  design,  such  as  the  substitution  of  other  ele- 
ments than  water  in  baptism,  and  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's 
Supper,  separate  themselves  from  the  true  Church  of  .Christ,  2 
Thess.  ii.  6;   i  Cor.  xi.  23. 

It  must  also  be  observed  here,  that  when  the  Confession  lays 
down  these  points,  it  includes  not  only  the  pure  outward  preaching 
of  the  gospel,  and  the  right  exhibition  of  the  sacraments,  but  their 
believing  acceptance  also,  which  means  nothing  more  than  heartily 
believing  and  conscientiously  living  as  a  Christian,  if  a  man  wishes 
to  be  regarded  as  a  true  member  of  the  universal  Christian  Church. 

Finally,  the  Article  teaches  "  that  for  the  true  unity  of  the  Church, 
it  is  not  necessary  that  uniform  ceremonies  instituted  by  men  should 
be  everywhere  observed,"  Matt,  xxviii.  20;  Luke  xvii.  20;  Col.  ii. 
16,  20,  21  ;   Rom.  xiv.  17. 

Now,  although  uniformity  in  church  service  is  desirable,  yet  the 
Confessors  were  compelled  to  take  this  ground  against  Rome.  They 
adopt  everything  plainly  scriptural,  and  whilst  they  admit  that  some 
human  rites  and  ceremonies  may  be  edifying,  yet  they  do  not  regard 
them  as  essential  to  the  unity  or  purity  of  the  Church.  The  Apology, 
IV.,  says:  "We  assert  that  those  constitute  one  Church  who  believe 
in  one  Christ,  and  have  one  gospel,  one  faith,  and  the  same  sacra- 
ments. *  *  To  maintain  this  harmony  then,  we  say,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  human  ordinances,  whether  they  be  universal  or  special, 
should  be  everywhere  the  same.* 

The  subject  of  "The  Church  "  has,  in  our  times,  assumed  a  vast 
importance.  Which  of  the  various  branches  of  those  who  profess 
Christianity  is  the  true  Church  f  which  exhibits  the  marks  of  the 
true  Church  most  prominently  ?  I  unhesitatingly  reply,  Our  own  : 
but  in  this  reply,  I  do  not  assume  the  presumptuous  and   unscrip- 

*For  a  full  discussion  of  this  subject,  see  Apology,  ch.  IV.,  Of  the  Church. 


226  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tural  position,  that  our  ministry  only  is  authorized  to  preach,  ad- 
minister the  sacraments,  and  govern  the  Church,  as  is  maintained 
by  some  others  not  belonging  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  This  ques- 
tion, and  not  a  few  others  growing  out  of  it,  familiar  to  theologians, 
naturally  belong  to  the  general  subject,  and  should  be  discussed 
in  a  treatise  upon  The  Church,  but  I  have  preferred  to  illustrate  the 
Article  in  its  general  character  as  set  forth  in  Article  VII.  The 
other  aspects  of  it  more  properly  belong  to  Article  VIII.,  which  I 
hereby  hand  over  to  my  successor,  wishing  him  all  success,  and 
trusting  that  he  will  laboriously  and  thoroughly  investigate  the 
subject.     . 


ARTICLE  VIII. 


THE  CHURCH  AS  IT  IS. 

By  h.  ziegler,  d.  d. 


"  Although  the  Church  is  properly  a  congregation  of  saints  and  true  behevers ; 
yet,  as  in  this  hfe,  many  hypocrites  and  wicked  men  are  mingled  with  them,  it 
is  lawful  for  us  also  to  receive  the  sacraments,  though  administered  by  bad 
men,  agreeably  to  the  declaration  of  our  Saviour,  that  'the  Scribes  and  Phari- 
sees sit  in  Moses'  seat,'  &c.  And  on  account  of  the  appointment  and  command 
of  Christ,  both  the  word  and  the  sacraments  are  efficacious,  even  when  ad- 
ministered by  wicked  men." 

"They  condemn  the  Donatists  and  such  hke,  who  denied  that  it  is  lawful  to 
make  use  of  the  ministry  of  wicked  men  in  the  Church,  and  who  hold  that  the 
ministry  of  such  is  useless  and  without  efficacy." 

TO  a  correct  understanding  of  the  specific  parts  of  any  document, 
it  is  necessary  to  examine  the  occasion  of  its  origin  as  a  whole, 
and  as  to  its  several  parts,  and  also  its  design,  its  contextual  rela- 
tions and  its  subject-matter.  We  will  introduce  specifically,  how- 
ever, only  two  of  these  topics :  whatever  of  the  others  is  necessary 
to  our  object,  will  be  introduced  in  connection  with  these. 

The  Contextual  Relations  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  as 
A  Whole,  to  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Articles. 
From  a  careful  examination  of  Arts.  I,  II,  III,  IV  and  XX;  V 
and  XVIII ;  IX,  X,  XII,  XX  and  XXIV;  VII  and  XII ;  XIV  and 
XXVIII;  and  XXV,  of  the  Confession,  we  have  the  following  re- 
lation of  dogmas — The  Triune  God,  as  creator  and  preserver  of  all 
things ;  man  fallen,  exposed  to  the  eternal  wrath  of  God  ;  deliverance 
from  this  wrath,  by  the  new  birth  ;  this  new  birth,  wrought  by  the 
Holy  Spirit;  the  Holy  Spirit,  operating  through  the  means  of  grace; 
the  means  of  grace,  efficacious  only  through  faith  in  Christ;  this 

227 


2  28  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

faith,  produced  by  the  use  of  the  means  of  grace ;  these  means  of 
grace,  intrusted  to  the  guardianship  of  the  Church  ;  and  the  Church, 
exercising  this  guardianship  through  her  ministry. 

We  may  sum  up  this  relation  of  dogmas  still  more  briefly,  thus 
— God,  the  agent  in  man's  salvation ;  man  fallen,  the  subject  of  sal- 
vation ;  the  word  of  God  and  the  sacraments,  the  means  of  salva- 
tion ;  the  Church,  the  instrumentality  through  which  God  renders 
these  means  efficacious  to  man's  salvation.  In  short,  the  Church  is 
God's  chosen  instrumentality  through  which  alone  he  designs  to 
render  efficacious  the  means  which  he  has  ordained  for  man's  salva- 
tion. A  divine  revelation,  with  all  its  divinely  appointed  institu- 
tions, would  avail  little  towards  securing  our  salvation,  unless  they 
resulted  in  the  organization  of  the  Church  ;  and  then,  not  unless  in- 
trusted to  the  Church  for  self-improvement,  for  safe-keeping,  for 
faithful  administration,  and  for  pure  transmission. 

Returning  now  to  our  relation  of  dogmas,  we  remark,  that  the 
last  two  are  implied  in  the  language  of  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Arti- 
cles, namely — "  Among  whom  the  gospel  is  preached  in  its  purity, 
and  the  holy  sacraments  are  administered,  according  to  the  gospel ;" 
and  "  the  sacraments  and  word  are  efficacious,  on  account  of  the  in- 
stitution and  command  of  Christ,  although  they  are  administered 
by  wicked  men." 

The  Special  Design  of  the  Seventh  and  Eighth 
Articles. 
In  the  New  Testament  we  find  two  classes  of  texts  descriptive  of 
the  Church,  sometimes  apparently  in  conflict  with  each  other,  and 
yet  constituting  a  harmonious  whole — the  one  being  ideal,  and  em- 
bod}'ing  the  elements  of  her  essential  nature,  the  other  being  em- 
pirical, and  embodying  the  phenomena  manifested  in  her  progressive 
development.  Of  the  former,  we  have  Eph.  v.  25-27,  and  i  Thess. 
V.  23,  24.  According  to  these  texts,  Christ  gave  himself  for  the 
Church,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it,  and  present  it  to  him- 
self a  glorious  Church,  not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such 
thing,  but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  without  blemish;  and  St.  Paul 
prays  for  the  members  of  the  Church,  that  God  might  sanctify  them 
wholly,  and  that  their  whole  spirit,  and  soul,  and  body,  might  be  pre- 
served blameless  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Of 
the  latter,  we  have  i  Cor.  i.  2,  and  iii.    1-23,  and  v.  1-13 ;  Gal.  i.  2, 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  229 

and  i.  6,  7,  and  iii.  1-29.  In  these  texts  St.  Paul  represents  the 
members  of  the  Church  at  Corinth  as  being  not  spiritual  but  carnal, 
and  babes  in  Christ,  as  not  being  able  to  bear  strong  meat,  as  toler- 
ating among  them  env^j'ing,  and  strife,  and  divisions,  and  even  for- 
nication; and  those  of  the  churches  of  Galatia,  as  having  already 
renounced  the  grace  of  Christ  for  another  gospel,  and  as  being  be- 
witched so  as  not  to  obey  the  truth. 

The  adoption  of  either  of  these  descriptions  exclusive  of  the  other, 
would  give  a  very  one-sided  conception  of  the  Church,  and  neces- 
sarily lead  to  many  and  fatal  errors.  Indeed,  this  would  be  the  re- 
sult, even  when  the  two  descriptions  were  not  properly  understood 
in  their  inseparable  relations  to  one  another.  The  exclusive  adop- 
tion of  the  ideal  must  lead  to  the  Donatistic  fanaticism,  or  to  indif- 
ference for  all  church  organizations,  whilst  the  empirical  alone  would 
encourage  corruption  and  formalism. 

The  historico-empirical  existence  of  the  Church  as  an  external, 
visible  manifestation,  and  thus  distinguished  from  its  essential  ideal, 
was  the  Roman  Catholic  conception  of  the  Church.  With  this  his- 
torico-empirical conception  was  soon  connected  the  opinion  that  the 
unity  of  the  Church  was  represented  in  the  bishops,  and  that  with- 
out submission  to  them  no  one  could  belong  to  this  unity,  or  one 
Catholic  Church.  Upon  this,  again,  was  engrafted  the  supremacy 
of  the  bishops  of  Rome,  and,  finally,  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope 
over  all  bishops,  over  all  Councils  and  powers,  spiritual  and  secular. 
Thus  the  Church  was  held  to  be  the  congregation  of  the  faithful 
throughout  the  whole  world,  united  under  one  invisible  Head,  Jesus 
Christ,  but  also  under  one  visible  head,  the  vicar  of  Christ,  the  pope 
of  Rome.  The  visible  head  was  then  held  as  having  full  power  to 
ordain  laws,  regulate  all  forms  of  worship,  sit  in  judgment  on  the 
word  of  God,  etc.  Again,  their  idea  of  the  faithful  is  absolute,  im- 
plicit submission  to  the  pope  in  all  things;  and  that  those  who  do 
not  thus  submit  do  not  belong  to  the  one  universal  Church. 

This  is  strongly  expressed  in  Bellarmine's  treatise  on  the  Church  : 
"We  hold  that  the  Church  is  only  one,  not  two,  and  that  this  one 
and  true  Church  is  the  body  of  men  which  is  bound  together  by  the 
profession  of  the  same  faith  and  the  communion  of  the  same  sacra- 
ments, under  the  government  of  legitimate  pastors,  and  especially  of 
the  one  vicar  of  Christ  upon  earth,  the  Roman  pontiff  From  this 
16 


230  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

definition,  it  is  easy  to  determine  who  belong  to  the  Church,  and 
who  do  not." 

After  stating  that  this  definition  consists  of  three  parts,  and  also 
what  persons  are  excluded  by  the  first  and  second,  he  adds:  "By 
the  third  are  excluded  schismatics  who  have  faith  and  the  sacra- 
ments, but  are  not  subject  to  the  legitimate  pastor,  and  who,  there- 
fore, profess  faith  and  partake  of  the  sacraments  outside  of  the 
Church.  But  all  others  are  included  in  this  definition,  although 
they  are  reprobates,  wicked,  and  ungodly."* 

Holding  this  conception  of  the  Church,  the  Catholics  denied  the 
Reformers  the  right  to  be  called  a  Church,  because,  in  their  opinion, 
they  had  separated  themselves  as  a  party  from  the  bosom  of  the 
universal  Church,  and  had  thus  departed  from  the  idea  of  the  Church 
as  it  was  developed  in  her  progressive  history.  To  this  exclusive 
empirical  conception  of  the  Church,  the  Reformers  objected;  and  to 
show  the  injustice  of  this  refusal,  and  to  maintain  their  right  to  be 
called  a  Church,  they  took  hold  of  the  essential  principle  as  found  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  embodied  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  namely, 
"  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  the  Communion  of  Saints."  This  they 
set  forth  in  Article  VII.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  It  opposes 
the  Romish  error,  that  the  Church  is  only  visible  under  the  one 
vicar  of  Christ,  the  pope  of  Rome.  It  gives  a  definition  of  the  ideal 
Church,  the  ccclcsia  stricte  dicta :  that  is,  as  Christ  her  Head  and 
his  apostles  delineated  her  and  designed  she  should  be  in  her  com- 
plete development — a  congregation  of  believers  and  saints,  of  holy 
persons,  made  such  by  faith,  and  who  hold  and  dispense  a  pure 
gospel  and  pure  sacraments,  and  who  are  all  bound  together  in  one 
inseparable  communion  throughout  the  world,  and  through  all 
time,  by  this  gospel  and  these  sacraments,  and  not  by  the  same 
•ordinances  of  human  appointment.  But  an  organized  society  con- 
sisting exclusively  of  saints,  has  never  existed  in  the  world.  The 
definition  of  the  Church  in  the  Seventh  Article,  so  far  as  it  relates 
to  its  essential  element,  does  not,  therefore,  describe  the  Church  as 
she  has  been  at  any  time  as  an  organized  society,  but  what  she  is 
in  her  inner,  essential  nature,  and  what  she  must  aim  to  become  in 
her  complete  development.  In  short:  it  is  the  New  Testament  ideal 
of  the  Church — the  inner  essence  and  the  outer  manifestation  in  its 
organized  form,  in  harmony  with  one  another. 

*  Winer's  Darstellung  des  Lehrbegriffs  der  Vers.  Chrst.  Kirchenparteien,  pp. 
167,  168.     Hag.  Hist.  Doctrines,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  291,  292. 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  23 1 

That  the  Confessors  thus  used  the  term.  "  Congrcgatio  sanctonini^' 
is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  in  the  German  copy  of  the  Confession 
they  employ  the  phraseology,  "  die  Versainmliing  allcr  Gldubigcnr 
and  also,  from  the  use  of  both  terms,  saints  and  believers,  in  both  the 
German  and  Latin  texts  of  the  Eighth  Article,  and  from  their  ac- 
companying adjuncts,  namely,  "although  the  Church  is  properly 
nothing  else  than  the  congregation  of  saints  and  true  believers,  yet, 
since  in  this  life  there  are  many  hypocrites  and  wicked  persons 
mixed  with  them,"  etc. 

This  definition  of  the  Church  in  the  Seventh  Article,  taken  strictly, 
as  consisting  only  of  saints  and  true  believers,  would  consequently 
exclude  all  religious  societies  from  the  Church,  even  the  Confessors 
themselves.  Therefore,  to  avoid  a  one-sidedness  on  their  part,  with 
its  concomitant  errors,  and  to  show  more  fully  also  that  they  speak 
here  of  the  ecclesia  stricte  dicta,  or  the  ideal  Church,  and  that  they 
have  a  broader  conception  of  the  Church  in  her  progressive  develop- 
ment, they  give  us  in  the  Eighth  Article  an  empirical  description  of 
the  Church — ecclesia  late  dicta. 

Our  further  discussion  will  be  embraced  in  the  following  theses  : 

I.  Thesis. 

Tlic  CJntrch  consists  Properly  of  True  Believers  or  Saints ;  and  as 
such  is  also  an  External,  Visible  Organization. 

The  Augustana  emploj's  the  terms,  saints  and  believers,  as  equiv- 
alent. In  Art.  VII.,  the  German  text  employs  the  term  believers, 
whilst  in  the  Latin,  we  have  saints.  In  Art.  VUL,  the  two  terms 
are  used  in  both  texts. 

Saints  and  believers  imply  each  other,  for  saints  are  such  by  a 
true  faith.  This  faith  first  procures  our  justification,  and,  secondly, 
through  it,  the  Holy  Spirit  sanctifies  us.  The  Holy  Spirit,  then, 
makes  us  saints  through  the  medium  of  our  faith.  These  saints, 
made  such  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  operating  and  communicating  divine 
light  and  life  through  the  word  as  the  objective  means,  and  through 
faith  as  the  subjective  means,  are  the  living  members  of  the  true 
Church — they  constitute  the  true  Church  in  her  inner  essence — and 
as  such,  they  are  the  congregation  of  saints  or  true  believers.  As 
these  are  scattered  throughout  the  world,  they  constitute  the  Church 
Catholic.     This    Catholic  Church    is,  again,   "the   communion    of 


232  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

saints,"  because  all  true  saints  stand  in  fellowship  with  Christ  and 
one  another.*  This  Catholic  Church,  as  the  communion  of  saints, 
is  also  called  the  body  of  Christ,  because  it  is  united  to  Christ  and 
receives  spiritual  life  from  him  as  its  Head.  It  is  once  more  desig- 
nated the  kingdom  of  Christ,  and  the  kingdom  of  God,  because  the 
Church  is  the  kingdom  of  God  established  by  Christ  on  earth,  and 
also,  because  Christ  rules  it  by  his  word,  and  by  the  indwelling  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  This  is  properly  the  true  Church,  in  her  internal, 
spiritual,  invisible  essence.  In  the  Apology,  it  is  described  in  the 
following  language.  The  Church  is  a  spiritual  people,  the  true 
people  of  God,  enlightened  in  their  hearts,  and  born  anew  by  the 
Holy  Spirit.  It  consists  mainly  in  the  internal  communion  of 
heavenly  gifts  in  the  heart,  as  the  Holy  Spirit,  faith,  and  the  fear 
and  love  of  God.  It  is  the  kingdom  of  Christ  distinguished  from 
the  kingdom  of  Satan.  Those  in  whom  Christ  effects  nothing  by 
his  Spirit,  are  not  members  of  the  Church.  The  Church  consists 
of  all  those,  throughout  the  world,  who  truly  know  Christ  and  the 
gospel,  who  have  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  who  properly  confess  the 
truth. 

But  whilst  this  internal,  spiritual  essence  properly  constitutes  the 
Church,  and  whilst,  as  such,  it  would  be  not  merely  invisible,  but 
wholly  supersensuous,  it  has,  nevertheless,  also  an  outer  and  sensu- 
ous side,  a  visible  organization. 

The  following  language  in  which  the  Apology  refers  to  the 
Church,  recognizes  its  external,  visible  organization.  It  is  an  out- 
ward gov^ernment — the  ungodly  and  hypocrites  have  fellowship  with 
the  true  Church  in  external  signs  of  name  and  office — the  ungodly 
are  in  this  life  among  true  Christians,  and  in  the  Church  as  teachers 
and  other  officers. 

Luther's  criteria  of  the  Church  also  recognize  its  visible  organiza- 
tion. These  are  the  word  of  God  and  the  sacraments  of  baptism 
and  the  Lord's  Supper,  expounded,  believed  and  observed ;  the  ex- 

*  Luther  regards  the  clause,  "the  communion  of  saints,"  in  the  Apostles' 
Creed  as  an  explanation  of  the  precediug  clause,  "the  Holy  Catholic  Church," 
that  is,  as  an  explanation  of  what  the  Church  is.  In  his  Larger  Catechism  he 
says :  "  The  meaning  of  this  clause  is  briefly  this — I  believe  there  is  a  holy  body 
and  congregation  on  earth,  consisting  purely  of  saints,  called  together  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  under  one  Head,  Christ,"  He  says,  the  word,  coniiiiunio,  should 
be  rendered,  not  fellowship,  but  a  congregation. 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT   IS.  233 

ercise  of  the  office  of  the  keys ;  the  calling  and  consecration  of 
church  officers,  and  the  service  of  public  worship.* 

Again :  although  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Articles  of  the  Confes- 
sion present  the  inner,  spiritual  side,  as  the  fundamental  constituent 
of  the  Church,  they,  nevertheless,  both  also  recognize  her  visible 
organization  ;  for  the  Church  has  the  gospel  preached  and  the  sac- 
raments administered,  and  also  observes  ceremonies  instituted  by 
men.f 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  starts  with  the  outer,  visible  organ- 
ization, and  which  she  regards  as  the  essence  of  the  Church,  to  find 
her  inner  complement ;  the  Lutheran,  on  the  contrary,  starts  with 
the  inner  essence,  and  from  it  develops  the  outer  organization.^ 

That  the  Lutheran  view,  as  set  over  against  the  Roman  Catholic, 
is  correct,  may  be  thus  argued.  The  Lutheran  view  harmonizes 
with  all  the  works  of  God.  The  present  universe  was  not  first,  and 
then  from  it  the  development  of  first  principles  ;  but  the  contrary. 
In  the  elementary  atoms  constituting  the  elementary  substances 
which  compose  all  bodies,  we  find  the  laws  requisite  and  adequate 
to  the  development  of  the  present  order  of  things.  Besides,  in  this 
development,  the  process  always  was  from  lower  to  higher  forms, 
orders  and  faculties,  commencing  with  inorganic  matter  and  pro- 
ceeding up  through  the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdoms,  and  all 
finally  destined,  as  one  coherent  universe,  to  contribute  to  the  eleva- 
tion of  man  to  his  high  moral  destiny.  Thus  has  God  brought 
forth  the  earth  and  its  inhabitants  by  commencing  with  elemen- 
tary principles.  The  full-grown  tree  is  not  first — it  is  developed 
from  a  seed,  which  also  contains  its  elementary  and  essential  prin- 
ciples. The  same  is  true  of  all  nature.  God's  procedure  in  regard 
to  the  Church  is  the  same.  Our  first  parents  were  the  first  church, 
constituted  such  after  the  fall,  by  faith  in  the  gospel — the  gospel  in  its 
true  essence — promulgated  by  God  himself  in  the  first  promise  of 
the  world's  Redeemer,  the  Destroyer  of  sin  and  Satan.  There 
already,  we  see  fallen  man ;    there  was  the  gospel ;    there  was  the 

*  Luther's  Werke.  Hal.,  Tom.  XVI.,  2784  ff. 

fFor  Prof.  Harnack's  views  on  this  point,  see  Evan.  Rev.,  Vol.  XIII.,  No. 
49,  pp.  126-129. 

J  See  this  more  fully  discussed  by  Guericke,  Ev.  Review,  Vol.  V.,  No.  i,  pp. 

17-27. 


2  34  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Redeemer;  there  was  faith;  there  wds  pardon;  and  there  v^diS  the 
Church,  in  its  essential  essence  first,  and  afterwards  its  external  or- 
ganization was  gradually  developed  and  completed. 

II.  Thesis. 

The  Chnrch,  therefore,  consists  essentially  and  necessarily  of  Tivo  In- 
separable Constituents — the  inner,  spiritual,  invisible  Essence  and  the 
outer,  visible  Organisation,  as  her  Empirical  Development. 

The  inner  essence,  as  seen  in  thesis  first,  is  the  soul  regenerated 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the  truth,  apprehended  by  faith,  and  thus 
brought  into  cheerful  submission  and  willing  obedience  to  Christ, 
and  animated  by  the  precious  hopes  of  the  gospel.  This  essence  is 
spiritual,  because  it  is  seated  in  our  rational  and  spiritual  nature,  and 
is  begotten  and  nourished  by  spiritual  agencies.  It  is  invisible,  not 
in  its  outward  manifestation,  but  in  its  spiritual  essence. 

The  outer  manifestation  is  the  organization  of  those  who  possess 
the  inner,  spiritual  essence,  into  a  society  for  the  attainment  of  their 
mutual  edification,  and  for  their  harmonious  and  efficient  co-ope- 
ration for  the  world's  conversion.  It  is  visible  because  of  its  formal 
organization  and  its  employment  of  sensible  means  for  the  attain- 
ment of  its  ends;  and  herein  it  must  have  a  progressive  development. 
This  constitutes  its  empirical  character. 

These  two,  the  inner  and  the  outer,  are  inseparable  constituents. 
Hagenbach  remarks  :  "  As  every  manifestation  which  is  the  result  of 
a  life-power,  has  two  sides,  so  also  has  the  Church  her  outer  or 
bodily,  and  her  inner  or  spiritual  side,  and  which  cannot  be  sep- 
arated from  one  another ;  nevertheless,  up  to  a  certain  point  these 
may  be  considered  separately,  and  with  the  greater  attention."* 
This  same  inner  side,  according  to  Luthardt,  as  the  true,  hidden 
Church,  constitutes  the  germ  of  all  individual,  visible  churches  ;  and, 
again,  the  visible  Church  is  the  dispenser  of  the  means  of  grace,  is  a 
necessary  part  of  the  Church  on  earth  ;  and  in  it  alone  can  we  find 
and  comprehend  the  Church  in  her  essential  nature.  Again  he  says  : 
the  Church,  including  her  two  sides,  is  neither  alone  visible  nor 
invisible,  but  is  both  at  the  same  time.f 

*Ency.  u.  Meth.,  5th  Edit.,  I64,  p.  197. 
fEv.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1873,  pp.  55-69. 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  235 

Hollaz,  speaking  of  the  relation  of  the  visible  to  the  invisible 
Church,  says;  "  We  do  not  maintain  that  the  visible  and  the  invisi- 
ble Church  are  two  churches  of  different  species,  or  of  contrary  op- 
position, but  we  call  the  visible  and  the  invisible  one  and  the  same 
Church  in  different  respects:  visible,  in  respect  of  the  called  ;  invisi- 
ble, in  respect  of  the  renewed — which  must  be  regarded  as  different 
modes,  neither  constituting  different  species,  nor  causing  contrary 
opposition,  because  the  invisible  body  of  the  renewed  are  included 
in  the  visible  body  of  the  called."* 

Guericke,  on  this  point,  says  :  "  Hence  the  Church,  in  Luther's 
Confession  of  Faith,  is  called  the  spiritual  body  of  Christ.  This 
spiritual  essence,  however,  must,  in  order  to  view  the  complete 
Church,  reveal  itself  in  an  outward,  bodily  form,  in  a  common  con- 
fession of  faith,  verbal  and  sacramental. "f 

Melanchthon,  in  his  Loci,  says:  "As  often  as  we  think  of  the 
Church,  we  contemplate  the  assembly  of  those  who  have  been 
called,  which  is  the  visible  church  ;  nor  do  we  dream  that  any  of  the 
elect  are  elsewhere  than  in  this  visible  church,  for  God  will  not  be 
invoked  nor  acknowledged  otherwise  than  as  he  reveals  himself,  nor 
does  he  reveal  himself,  except  in  the  visible  church,  in  which  alone 
the  voice  of  the  Gospel  sounds,  nor  do  we  feign  another  church, 
invisible  and  silent."| 

The  truth  is — all  who  constitute  the  inner,  invisible  essence  of  the 
Church,  also  constitute  her  true  external  complement,  or  organized 
congregation  ;  and  as  thus  organized,  the  Church  can  not  be  other- 
wise than  visible. 

That  the  Church  consists  necessarily  of  these  two  inseparable 
elements,  may  be  argued  from  the  means  of  her  production  and  edi- 
fication, and  from  her  design.  The  former  are  the  word  of  God, 
including  the  sacraments,  and  its  whole  system  of  doctrines,  duties, 
and  government,  and  faith  uniting  to  Christ,  and  working  by  love. 
The  former  has  been,  and  could  be,  received,  guarded,  faithfully 
transmitted,  and  properly  administered,  only  by  truly  regenerated 
souls,  and  by  them,  only  in  an  associated  and  organized  capacity. 
The    system  of  doctrines,  etc.,  especially  when  considered  in  con- 

*Hutt.  Red.,  8th  Edit.,  pp.  324,  325* 

f  Ev.  Rev.,  vol.  v.,  No.  i,  p.  19. 

J  Quoted  by  Guericke,  Ev.  Rev.,  vol.  v.,  No.  i,  p.  25. 


236  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

nection  with  the  design  of  the  Church,  again,  constrains  all  truly 
regenerated  souls  to  consecrate  themselves  in  organized  co-operation 
with  each  other,  for  their  mutual  edification  and  for  the  world's  con- 
version. Here,  then,  we  have  the  Church,  consisting  necessarily  and 
essentially  of  her  two  inseparable  elements — the  inner  and  the  outer, 
the  invisible  and  the  visible. 

III.  Thesis. 
TJie  Church  is  the  only  Trustee  and  Steward  of  the  Means  of  Grace. 

The  Church  has  originally  received  the  means  of  grace,  and  to 
her  they  have  been  intrusted  as  a  sacred  deposit  for  safe-keeping ; 
and  in  this  sense,  she  is,  as  forcibly  expressed  in  German,  ''die  hin- 
haberinn  der  Gnadeninittel."  Again:  She  is  bound  to  dispense  these 
means  for  the  edification  of  all  her  members,  and  for  the  conversion 
of  the  outside  world,  and  also  to  transmit  them  unadulterated  to  all 
coming  ages.  To  express  this,  German  theologians  aptly  employ, 
*'die  Tragerinn  der  Gnademnitteir 

To  cover  the  ground  of  both  these  German  technicalities,  I  em- 
ploy, in  this  thesis,  the  terms  Trustee  and  Steward. 

Both  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Articles  imply  this  thesis,  in  the 
words — "among  whom  the  gospel  is  preached  in  its  purity,"  etc.; 
and  also,  "both  the  word  and  the  sacraments  are  efficacious,"  etc. 

As  the  trustee  and  steward  of  the  means  of  grace,  the  Church  is, 
therefore,  an  institution,  to  receive,  appropriate,  guard,  dispense,  and 
transmit  these  means.  If  all  this  can  be  accomplished  outside  and 
independently  of  the  Church,  then  was  her  Founder  mistaken  in  re- 
gard to  the  necessity  of  her  organization  and  perpetuity.  The 
Church  is  "  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth." 

Luther,  in  his  Larger  Catechism,  (Art.  III.,  Apostles'  Creed,) 
teaches  that  the  following  things  can  be  attained  only  in  and  through 
the  Church — the  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  regeneration  and 
sanctification,  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  the  administration  of  the 
sacraments,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  eternal  life;  and  that  with- 
out the  Church  there  can  be  no  knowledge  of  Jesus,  no  forgiveness 
of  sins,  no  works  of  grace  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  that  man  is  under 
the  dominion  of  the  devil,  and  that,  although  he  may  have  some 
knowledge  of  God,  he  can  not  obtain  eternal  life.  He  says:  "The 
Holy  Spirit  accomplishes  this  sanctification  through  the  following 
means,  namely,  the  communion  of  saints,  or  the  Christian  Church, 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  237 

the  remission  of  sins,  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  eternal  Hfe." 
Again:  "The  Holy  Ghost  exerts  his  agency  without  intermission, 
until  the  last  day,  and  for  this  purpose  he  has  ordained  a  community 
or  church  upon  earth,  through  which  he  speaks  and  performs  all 
things."  "  For  before  we  had  obtained  this  " — namely,  membership 
in  the  Christian  Church — "we  were  entirely  the  subjects  of  Satan, 
as  those  who  knew  nothing  of  God  and  Christ.  Thus,  until  the 
last  day.  the  Holy  Ghost  will  remain,  with  this  holy  community  or 
Christian  Church,  through  which  he  persuades  us,  and  which  he 
uses  for  the  purpose  of  promulgating  and  exercising  the  word." 
"Out  of  the  Christian  Church,  however,  where  the  gospel  does  not 
exert  its  influence,  there  is  no  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  consequently 
there  can  be  no  holiness." 

The  connection  of  the  several  parts  of  the  third  Article  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  also  implies  the  same  thing.  The  Holy  Ghost,  as 
the  author  of  the  Church,  occupies  the  first  place;  then  follows  the 
Church;  to  which  succeeds  the  forgiveness  of  sins;  thus  indicating 
that  through  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  Church,  we 
obtain  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins.  To  the  Church,  then,  and  to  her 
alone,  are  committed  and  intrusted,  from  Christ  her  Head,  for  safe- 
keeping, for  efficient  administration,  and  for  faithful  transmission  to 
the  end  of  time,  the  word,  the  sacraments,  and  the  ministry.  In 
other  words:  the  Church  is  the  only  Innhaberinn  and  Triigerinn  of 
the  means  of  grace.  Independent  of  the  Church,  there  can  be  no 
means  of  grace,  and,  ordinarily,  no  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
no  saving  faith,  no  salvation. 

From  this  thesis,  arises  the  importance  and  duty  of  being  in 
fellowship  with  the  Church. 

Since  the  Church  is  the  only  trustee  and  steward  of  the  means  of 
grace,  and  since  the  Holy  Spirit  works  saving  faith  only  through 
these  means,  it  must  follow,  that  alone  through  the  instrumentality 
of  the  Church,  can  man  be  saved,  Rom.  x.  13-17.  If  any  additional 
argument  is  necessary  to  establish  this  point,  we  will  merely  sup- 
pose that  the  Church  with  her  means  of  grace,  and  with  the  knowl- 
edge of  religious  truth  which  she  has  diffused  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  and  also  the  accompanying  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
were  all  removed  from  the  world,  and  then  put  the  question,  how 
now  can  anyone  be  saved?  The  world  would  be  thrown  back  into 
heathendom,  and  left  to  the  mere  light  of  nature,  without  even  the 


238  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

traditionary  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  God,  coming  from 
necessity  originally  only  through  a  divine  revelation.  To  suppose 
man  capable  of  being  saved  independently  of  the  Church,  would  be 
the  same  as  to  suppose  him  capable  of  salvation  without  a  positive 
revelation  of  the  distinctive  doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  without  a 
saving  faith  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  union  with  Christ 
through  faith  is  necessary  to  salvation.  Acts  iv.  12,  and  x.  43;  Jno. 
XV.  I.  If,  then,  man  cannot  be  saved  independently  of  the  Church's 
instrumentality,  can  he  be,  outside  of  the  Church? 

There  is  a  two-fold  union  with  the  Church — -first,  an  inner  soul^ 
union,  and  which  consists  in  being  in  fellowship  with  Christ  by 
faith,  and  in  a  sincere  choice  and  purpose  of  making  a  formal  con- 
nection with  the  organized  congregation  of  believers;  and,  secondly, 
an  actual  formal  connection  with  the  Church,  through  baptism,  in- 
cluding a  public  profession  of  faith  in  Christ. 

It  is  evident,  that  if  saved  without  union  with  the  Church  by  the 
first  mode  of  connection,  it  Would  be  salvation  without  Christ,  which 
is  impossible.  But  as  union  with  the  Church  by  this  mode  includes 
a  sincere  choice  and  purpose  of  an  actual  formal  connection  with 
the  organized  congregation  of  believers,  it  is  again  evident  that 
whoever  refuses  to  form  such  a  union,  where  it  is  possible,  can  not 
be  in  the  Church  even  by  the  first  mode  of  connection — that  is^ 
whoever,  of  his  own  choice,  refuses  to  unite  with  the  Church  in  her 
visible  organization,  cannot  belong  to  her  invisible  and  essential 
communion.  Again  :  whoever  voluntarily  disregards  an  institution 
of  Christ,  or  voluntarily  disobeys  any  of  his  commands,  cannot  be 
in  communion  with  him  by  faith ;  both  of  which  are  done  by  him 
who  voluntarily  refuses  to  unite  with  the  congregation  of  God's 
people,  or  the  Church.  It  follows,  then,  that  whoever  is  out  of  the 
visible  Church  from  choice,  does  not  belong  to  Christ,  and  there- 
fore can  not  be  saved.  In  the  Church  by  the  first  mode  of  union, 
whilst  one  is  outside  of  her  by  the  second  mode,  can  avail  for  our 
salvation  only  so  long  as  the  latter  is  impossible.  It  is  thus  evi- 
dent how  we  must  understand  the  phrase,  "  out  of  the  Church  there 
is  no  salvation." 

Whilst  it  is  true  that  whoever  is  in  union  with  Christ  by  faith,  is 
in  a  state  of  justification,  and  therefore  entitled  to  salvation,  it  is 
nevertheless  equally  true,  that  whoever  voluntarily  refuses  connec- 
tion with  the  Church's  visible  organization,  or  whoever  having  once 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  239 

formed  such  connection,  and  again  voluntarily  dissolves  it,  does  by 
such  deliberate  act  of  disobedience  to  Christ,  make  his  justification 
and  consequent  salvation,  impossible. 

But  there  are  other  reasons  besides  our  personal  salvation,  that 
show  the  importance  and  duty  of  being  in  fellowship  with  the  visi- 
ble Church.  The  mutual  edification  of  believers  depends  on  a 
visible  church-organization.  The  gifts  and  graces  of  all  are  neces- 
sary to  the  fullest  development  of  each.  To  show  the  importance 
of  this  mutual  edification,  St.  Paul  devotes  to  its  elucidation  no  less 
than  three  chapters  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  chaps.  12- 
14.  I  will  give  but  two  brief  quotations.  "  How  is  it  then,  breth- 
ren? when  ye  come  together,  every  one  of  you  hath  a  psalm,  hath 
a  doctrine,  hath  a  tongue,  hath  a  revelation,  hath  an  interpretation. 
Let  all  things  be  done  unto  edifying."  "  For  ye  may  all  prophesy, 
one  by  one,  that  all  may  learn,  and  that  all  may  be  comforted." 
Christ  says :  "  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them."  To  the  Hebrews,  St.  Paul 
writes :  "  Forsake  not  the  assembling  of  yourselves  together,  as  the 
manner  of  some  is,  but  exhort  one  another ;  and  so  much  the  more 
as  ye  see  the  day  approaching." 

The  duty  of  bringing  the  outside  world  to  a  saving  knowledge  of 
Christ  shows  the  importance  of  all  believers  being  in  union  with 
the  visible  Church.  We  have  been  bought  with  the  precious  blood 
of  the  Son  of  God;  therefore  we  are  not  our  own,  but  are  under 
the  strongest  possible  obligations  to  devote  ourselves  to  his  service 
in  such  a  way  as  will  put  us  in  a  condition  to  accomplish  the  great- 
est amount  of  good.  Our  influence  for  Christ  can  be  exerted  to  its 
fullest  extent,  only  through  the  Church.  If,  then,  we  would  make 
our  talents  and  labors  fully  available  for  Christ  and  our  fellow-men, 
we  dare  not  stand  aloof  from  the  Church. 

IV.  Thesis. 

Tlie  J  \ilidiiy  and  Efficacy  of  the  Word  and  Sacraments  depend  not  on 
the  Administrator,  but  on  their  own  Nature,  and  on  tJie  Institution 
and  Comjnand  of  Christ. 

Article  Eighth  of  the  Confession  (German  copy)  says :  "  The  sac- 
raments are  nevertheless  efficacious,  although  the  nu'nisters  by 
whom  they  are  dispensed  are  not  pious."     The  Latin  text  reads: 


240  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"  The  sacraments  and  the  word  are  efficacious  on  account  of  the 
appointment  and  command  of  Christ,  although  they  are  adminis- 
tered by  wicked  men." 

When  the  Confessors  make  the  efficacy  of  the  means  of  grace 
depend  on  the  institution  and  command  of  Christ,  they  teach,  by 
impHcation,  that  there  is  also  an  adaptation  inherent  in  the  means 
themselves  to  accomplish  the  design  of  their  institution.  This,  in- 
deed, is  true  of  all  God's  works.  In  the  physical  and  in  the  moral 
world,  all  things  are  related  to  each  other  as  means  and  ends. 

The  efficacy  of  the  means  of  grace  depends,  then,  on  their  own 
nature,  and  on  the  institution  and  command  of  Christ. 

The  end  to  be  attained  by  the  means  of  grace  is  salvation — or, 
specifically,  conviction  of  sin,  repentance,  faith,  pardon  and  sanctifi- 
cation. 

I  need  scarcely  argue  that  there  is  an  inherent  adaptation  in  the 
law  and  the  gospel,  therefore,  also,  in  the  sacraments,  to  the  attain- 
ment of  these  ends.  The  fact  that  these  means  do  not  attain  these 
ends  without  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  no  argument  against 
this  natural  adaptation  as  means  to  ends.  If  it  were,  then  the 
Holy  Spirit  might  as  certainly  and  successfully  accomplish  his 
works  of  regeneration  and  sanctification  without  these  means — in- 
deed, without  any  means.  Then,  however,  the  whole  plan  of  sal- 
vation would  be  a  matter  of  mere  arbitrary  appointment,  without 
any  absolute  and  inherent  necessity.  But  the  Holy  Spirit  works 
through  the  word  and  sacraments  because  they  are  means  adapted 
to  the  attainment  of  the  ends  designed ;  and  he  does  not  accomplish 
these  ends  in  those  who  neglect  these  means,  because  they  are  the 
only  appointed  and  recognized  means  that  have  this  adaptation. 

The  gospel  "  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that 
believeih,"  and  the  word  preached  did  not  profit  the  Israelites,  "  not 
being  mixed  with  faith  in  them  that  heard  it,"  Rom.  i.  16;  Heb.  iv. 
2.  This  fact,  that  the  word  becomes  efficacious  only  when  received 
b}^  faith,  and  fails  of  its  efficacy  when  not  believed,  at  once  estab- 
lishes its  inherent  adaptation  to  the  attainment  of  the  ends  proposed. 

The  following  texts  also  prove  this  inherent  adaptation :  Jer.  xxiii. 
28,  29;  Heb.  iv.  12;   Isa.  Iv.  10,  11. 

The  efficacy  of  the  means  of  grace  depends,  secondly,  on  the  in- 
stitution and  command  of  Christ. 

A  religion  that  has,  or  that   is  only  believed   to  have,  no  higher 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  24I 

than  a  human  origin,  has  no  power  to  reform  or  save  mankind. 
Reh'gion  that  has  no  divine  authority  to  bind  the  conscience,  will 
sink  to  a  level  with  mere  moral  science.  But  let  it  come  from  God, 
or  even  be  only  believed  to  have  a  divine  origin,  and  at  once  it 
brings  the  conscience  under  the  strongest  of  all  obligations  and 
motives — the  authority  of  God,  and  the  interests  of  eternity.  With- 
out divine  authority,  the  word  and  sacraments  would  then  be  mere 
human  institutions ;  and  as  such,  they  could  not  possess  even  the 
power  of  the  truths  of  natural  religion  to  reform  and  save  mankind. 
But  whatever  Christ  has  instituted  and  commanded,  comes  to  us 
with  divine  authority — with  this  authority,  therefore,  we  receive  the 
word  and  sacraments  of  Christ,  because  instituted  and  commanded 
by  him. 

This  natural  adaptation  to  the  ends  proposed,  and  their  divine 
authority  thus  established,  give  these  means  more  than  a  mere 
logico-moral  efficacy.  They  are,  as  St.  Paul  says,  Rom,  i.  16,  '"  tJie 
power  of  God  iiiito  salvation!' 

It  follows,  then,  that  the  validity  and  efficacy  of  the  word  and 
sacraments  do  not  depend  on  the  administrator.  His  goodness 
cannot  increase  their  efficacy,  neither  can  his  wickedness  nor  his 
heterodoxy  decrease  it,  or  deprive  them  of  it,  because  in  neither 
case  can  he  change  their  natural  adaptation  to  the  end  proposed, 
nor  their  authority  resulting  from  the  institution  and  command  of 
Christ. 

V.  Thesis. 

Neither  the  Heretical  nor  the  Ungodly  Character  of  the  Minister  can 
make  it  Sinful  for  the  True  Believer  10  hear  the  Word  and  receive 
the  Sacraments  administered  by  him. 

The  Latin  text  of  our  Eighth  Article  reads:  "Yet  since  in  this 
life  there  are  many  hypocrites  and  wicked  persons  mixed  with  them, 
it  is  lawful  to  receive  the  sacraments  which  are  administered  by 
wicked  men,  agreeably  to  the  word  of  Christ:  'the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  sit  in  Moses'  seat.'  "  Also  :  "  They  condemn  the  Dona- 
tists  and  such  like,  who  denied  that  it  is  lawful  to  make  use  of  the 
ministry  of  wicked  persons  in  the  Church,  and  maintained  that  the 
ministry  of  wicked  men  is  useless  and  without  efficacy."  Whilst 
the  sacraments  alone  are  mentioned  in  these  clauses,  it  is  evident 
that  the  lawfulness  of  receiving  them  when  administered  by  wicked 


242  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

men,  refers  also  to  the  word  preached  by  them  in  its  broader  sense. 
The  sacraments  are  useful  and  efficacious  only  because  they  are 
means  of  grace,  and  they  are  means  of  grace  because  of  the  word  of 
God  accompanying  them  and  symbolized  by  them.  And  the  word, 
thus  in  the  sacraments,  is  the  very  essence  of  the  gospel.  If,  then, 
it  is  lawful  to  receive  the  essence  of  the  word,  when  administered  in 
the  sacraments  by  wicked  men,  the  same  lawfulness  must  extend  to 
the  reception  of  the  whole  word  preached  by  them.  This  is  also 
plainly  implied  in  the  condemnatory  clause,  in  the  words:  "  lie  ere 
uti  ministerio  maloriiDi ;"  for  this  expresses  the  lawfulness  of  using 
the  ministry  of  wicked  men  in  its  broadest  sense.  This  lawfulness 
is  evident,  first,  from  the  qualifications  required  to  receive  the  sac- 
raments with  their  promised  blessings:  namely,  repentance  and 
faith.  As  these  qualifications  refer  exclusively  to  the  recipient  and 
the  word,  and  in  no  sense  to  the  administrator,  the  character  of  the 
latter  cannot  change  the  lawfulness  of  receiving  them,  because  it 
cannot  change  the  qualifications  of  the  former  to  partake  of  them. 

It  is  evident,  seeondly,  from  the  elements  constituting  the  validity 
or  efficacy  of  the  sacraments.  These,  as  seen  in  thesis  fourth,  are 
their  nature  and  the  institution  and  command  of  Christ.  It  was 
there  shown,  that  since  the  administrator,  notwithstanding  his 
heterodoxy  and  immorality,  could  destroy  neither  the  nature  of 
the  sacraments,  nor  the  institution  and  command  of  Christ,  and  as 
these  involved  their  adaptation  to  attain  the  ends  proposed,  and 
their  power  supremely  to  bind  the  conscience,  he,  consequently, 
could  not  destroy  their  efficacy.  But  if  the  administrator  cannot 
destroy  their  efficacy,  then  it  follows  that  it  is  lawful  for  true  be- 
lievers to  receive  them  at  his  hands,  though  he  may  be  both 
heterodox  and  immoral.  . 

This  lawfulness  is  evident,  thirdly,  from  the  mode  of  their  ope- 
ration— that  is,  through  the  word  and  promise  of  God  set  forth  by 
them,  through  our  faith  appropriating  their  promised  blessings,  and 
through  the  Holy  Spirit  operating  through  them.  But,  again,  the 
heretical  and  immoral  character  of  the  administrator  can  deprive  us 
of  none  of  these  ;  therefore,  the  Holy  Spirit  continues  to  do  his  ap- 
propriate work  through  our  faith  resting  on  the  sacramental  word 
and  promise.  Therefore  again  follows  the  lawfulness  of  receiving 
the  word  and  sacraments  administered  by  him. 

We  may,  then,  say  with  Christ  and  the  Confession  :  "  The  Scribes 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  243 

and  Pharisees  sit  in  Moses'  seat;  all,  therefore,  whatsoever  they  bid 
you  observe,  that  observe  and  do,  but  do  not  ye  after  their  works, 
for  they  say  and  do  not." 

But  wiiilst  the  heterodoxy  and  immorality  of  the  minister  can 
neither  destroy  the  efficacy  of  the  means  of  grace,  nor  make  it  un- 
lawful to  receive  them  at  his  hands,  this  is  no  encouragement  nor 
justification  to  the  Church  to  be  indifferent  to  the  character  and  faith 
of  her  clergy ;  because  their  immorality  and  heterodoxy  may,  and 
often  do,  communicate  themseves  to  the  laity.  This  has  in  many 
cases  led  to  such  corruption  in  doctrine  and  life,  as  to  make  ship- 
wreck of  faith,  contravene  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
thus  nullify  the  efficacy  of  the  means  of  grace.  The  solemn  trust 
confided  to  the  Church,  therefore,  demands  of  her  that  she  guard 
with  the  most  scrupulous  vigilance  the  faith  and  morals  of  her 
clergy.  "  But  though  we  or  an  angel  from  heaven  preach  any  other 
Gospel  unto  you  than  that  we  have  preached,  let  him  be  accursed." 
"  If  there  come  any  unto  you,  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive 
him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid  him  God-speed,  for  he  that 
biddeth  him  God-speed  is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds."  "  Beware  of 
false  prophets."     Gal.  i.  6-9;  2  John  10,  1 1  ;  Matt.  vii.  15. 

The  Apology  says  :  "  Yet  we  ought  not  to  receive  or  hear  false 
teachers,  because  the}'  are  not  in  Christ's  stead,  but  are  antichrists."* 

VI.  Thesis. 

Around  the  external  factor  of  the  Church  is  gathered  a  Foreign  Mate- 
rial, heterogeneous  in  its  Elements,  antagonistic  in  its  Aims,  and 
destructive  in  its  Operations  and  Infuences. 

The  Confessors  say:  the  people  of  God  receive  spiritual  bless- 
ings, are  enlightened,  strengthened,  and  ruled  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  are,  therefore,  as  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  distinguished  from  the 
kingdom  of  Satan.  Therefore,  the  ungodly,  as  belonging  to  the  king- 
dom of  Satan,  cannot  be  the  Church — tlicy  are  only  among  Chris- 
tians, and  in  the  Church,  but  they  are  not  on  this  account  a  part  of 
the  kingdom  of  Christ.  "  Now,  although  the  wicked  and  ungodly 
hypocrites  have  fellowship  with  the  true  Church  in  external  signs, 
in  name  and  office ;  yet  when  we  would  strictly  define  what  the 
Church  is,  we  must  speak  of  the  Church  called  the  body  of  Christ. 

*Mull.  Symb.  BiJch.,  vol.  i.,  A.  C,  W.  156  (48).  p.  162. 


244  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

and  having  communion  not  only  in  external  signs,  but  also  holding 
faith  and  the  Holy  Spirit  in  its  bosom."*  Therefore  the  ungodly 
do  not  belong  to  the  true  body  of  Christ,  to  the  internal  essence  of 
the  Church,  but  only  to  its  external  organization,  and  to  this  even 
only  in  outward  profession  of  name,  office  and  worship. 

This  foreign  material  gathered  around  the  external  factor  of  the 
Church  is,  however,  heterogeneous  in  its  elements  to  those  of  the 
true  Church.  The  elements  of  the  one  are,  the  depravity  of  our 
unrenewed  nature,  its  enmity  against  God,  and  its  being  under  tJie 
dominion  of  unbelief,  sin,  and  the  devil;  the  elements  of  the  other 
are,  the  regeneration  of  the  soul  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  its  reanimation 
by  the  love  of  God  and  the  precious  hopes  of  the  Gospel,  and  its 
submission  to  the  rule  of  Christ.  Thus  heterogeneous  in  their  ele- 
ments, the  foreign  material,  especially  when  it  becomes  predomi- 
nant, not  unfrequently  succeeds  in  introducing  into  the  Church  other 
elements  in  doctrine,  government,  cultus,  and  morals,  congenial  to 
its  own  nature.  In  the  Romish  Church  the  following  are  exam- 
ples— salvation  by  works,  papal  infallibility,  priestly  absolution, 
implicit  submission  to  the  government  of  an  ecclesiastical  hierarchy, 
auricular  confession,  the  worship  of  images,  prayers  to  the  saints, 
prayers  for  the  dead,  indulgences,  etc.  In  the  Protestant  churches 
M^e  may  bring  under  this  class  the  neglect  of  church  discipline,  its 
abuse  to  party  and  selfish  purposes,  the  disregard  of  each  others' 
acts  of  discipline  by  different  denominations,  denominational  exclu- 
siveness  on  the  ground  of  infallible  orthodoxy,  rationalism,  the 
denial  of  plenary  inspiration,  etc. 

As  "  the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God,"  so  we  may  say  of 
these  foreign  elements ;  they  are  at  enmity  with  the  elements  and 
nature  of  the  true  Church. 

Again  :  this  foreign  element  is  antagonistic  in  its  aims  to  those  of 
the  true  Church. 

This  antagonism  is  found,  not  between  the  two  elements  of  the 
Church,  its  inner  and  its  outer  sides,  but  between  this  dual  Church 
and  the  foreign  and  heterogeneous  materials  which  have  aggregated 
themselves  around  the  Church's  visible  organization.  The  antago- 
nism itself  is  seated  in  their  heterogeneous  elements  and  in  their 
conflicting  aims.     A  soul  ruled  by  the  devil,  and  whose  aim  is  the 

*Mull.  Symb.  Buch.,  vol.  i.,  A.  C,  W.  147  (12  &  13),  p.  154.  Henk.  Bk. 
Cone,  p.  217. 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  245 

glory  of  self,  must  be  antagonistic  to  the  soul  ruled  by  Christ,  and 
whose  aim  is  the  welfare  of  man  and  the  glory  of  God.  This  an- 
tagonism will  be  seen  also  in  the  heterogeneous  elements  in  doc- 
trine, government,  cultus  and  morals,  to  which  reference  has  already 
been  made. 

To  this  antagonism  we  may  apply  the  following  scripture  lan.- 
guage — "  Can  two  walk  together  except  they  be  agreed  ?  "  "  No 
man  can  serve  two  masters,  for  either  he  will  hate  the  one  and  love 
the  other,  or  else  he  will  hold  to  the  one  and  despise  the  other.  Ye 
cannot  serve  God  and  mammon."  "  What  fellowship  hath  righteous- 
ness with  unrighteousness?  and  what  communion  hath  light  with 
darkness  ?  and  what  concord  hath  Christ  with  Belial  ?  what  part 
hath  he  that  believeth  with  an  infidel?  and  what  agreement  hath  the 
temple  of  God  with  idols?"  Amos  iii.  3;  Matt.  vi.  24;  2  Cor.  vi. 
14-16  ;   I  John  ii.  18,  19. 

These  heterogeneous  elements  and  antagonistic  aims  are  neces- 
sarily destructive  of  each  other  in  their  operations  and  influences. 

We  have  already  seen  how  the  foreign  material  often  introduces 
into  the  church  elements  congenial  to  its  own  nature.  Their  heter- 
ogeneousness  and  antagonism  are  such  that  they  can  never  harmo- 
nize. A  temporary  compromise  may  be,  and  often  is  effected;  but  in 
the  end  they  must  come  into  open  conflict,  and  the  one  must  destroy 
the  other.  It  may  be  said  with  truth  that  here  not  unfrequently,  "  a 
little  leaven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump." 

The  whole  history  of  the  Church,  both  Jewish  and  Christian,  is  a 
verification  of  this  destructive  tendency,  especially  the  Romish 
Church  before  and  in  the  Reformation.  The  one  doctrine  of  justifi- 
cation by  faith  alone,  shook  the  papal  throne  to  its  foundation,  and 
has  continued  ever  since  in  open  conflict  with  its  whole  system. 
We  may  then  aptly  apply  to  this  whole  foreign  element  the  words  of 
Christ:  "  Take  heed  and  beware  of  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees."  ; 

We  have  in  our  national  history  a  sad  example  of  two  such  ele- 
ments. The  Declaration  of  Independence  asserts  and  maintains  the 
equality  of  all  men  by  creation,  and  their  endowment  by  their  Cre- 
ator with  the  inalienable  rights  of  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of 
happiness.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  in  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  Federal  Government,  tolerated  the  holding  of  men  bound 
to  service — that  is,  tolerated  human  slavery.  The  antagonism  ot 
17 


I 


246  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

these  two  heterogeneous  elements — human  freedom  and  human 
slavery — came  from  necessity  into  open  and  final  conflict.  The  sal- 
vation of  the  nation  made  emancipation  a  necessity. 

In  concluding  this  thesis,  I  maintain,  therefore,  the  right  and  duty 
of  the  Church  to  remove  from  her  visible  organization  as  her  insepar- 
able external  factor  all  those  elements  which  endanger  her  existence 
or  her  purity,  or  impede  her  progress.  The  Church  must  always 
bear  her  earnest  and  clear  testimony  against  heterodoxy  and  immo- 
rality. She  dare  not  neglect  the  exercise  of  discipline  against  here- 
tics and  the  openly  immoral  and  ungodly.  Neither  can  she  be  safe 
nor  guiltless,  and  allow  her  liturgical  service  to  usurp  the  place  of  a 
free  and  genuine  spiritual  worship.  "  If  thy  brother  transgress 
against  thee,  go  and  tell  him  his  fault,"  etc.  "  If  there  come  any 
unto  you,  and  bring  not  this  docrine,  receive  him  not  into  your 
house,  neither  bid  him  God-speed,"  etc.  "Therefore  put  away  from 
among  yourselves  that  wicked  person."  "  I  have  written  unto  you 
not  to  keep  company,  if  any  man  that  is  called  a  brother  be  a  forni- 
cator, or  covetous,  or  an  idolater,  or  a  railer,  or  a  drunkard,  or  an 
extortioner;  with  such  an  one  no  not  to  eat,"  "  Wherefore  come 
out  from  among  them,  and  be  ye  separate,  saith  the  Lord,  and  touch 
not  the  unclean  thing,  and  I  will  receive  you,"  etc.  Matt,  xviii, 
15-18 ;  2  John  10,  1 1  ;   I  Cor.  v.  1 1-13  ;  2  Cor.  vi.  14-18. 

VII.  Thesis. 

//  is  Implied  in  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Articles  of  the  Confession, 

that  the  Church  has  not  yet  attained  her  Ideal  Perfection. 

In  these  two  Articles  the  marks  of  the  ideal  Church  are  the  fol- 
lowing— it  consists  only  of  saints  and  true  believers;  in  it  the  gos- 
pel is  preached  in  its  purity,  and  the  sacraments  are  administered 
according  to  their  true  intent  and  meaning;  and  again,  in  it  there  is 
to  be  no  schism,  but  all  its  parts  are  to  be  perfectly  united  under 
Christ  its  one  and  only  Head,  in  one  mind  and  in  one  judgment. 

This  is  thus  delineated  in  the  New  Testament.  Christ  is  repre- 
sented as  loving  the  Church  and  giving  himself  for  it,  "that  he 
might  sanctify  and  cleanse  jt^  *  *  *  and  that  he  might  present  it  to 
himself  a  glorious  Church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such 
thing,  but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  without  blemish."  St.  Paul 
prays:  "And  the  very  God  of  peace  sanctify  you  wholly;  and  I  pray 
God  your  whole  spirit  and  soul  and  body  be  preserved  blameless 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  247 

unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  Again, he  admonishes: 
"  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  that  ye  all  speak  the  same  thing,  and  that  there  be  no  divisions 
among  you,  but  that  ye  be  perfectly  joined  together  in  the  same 
mind  and  in  the  same  judgment."  Christ  prays  for  believers:  "that 
they  all  may  be  one,  as  thou  Father  art  in  me  and  I  in  thee,  that 
they  also  may  be  one  in  us."  Eph.  v.  25-27  ;  i  Thess.  v.  23  ;  i  Cor. 
i.  10;  John  xvii.  20,  21. 

In  so  far  as  the  ideal  perfection  of  the  Church  relates  to  her  unity 
and  a  pure  gospel  and  pure  sacraments,  it  belongs  to  Article  Seventh; 
but  in  so  far  as  its  membership  should  consist  of  only  saints  and 
true  believers,  it  comes  within  the  province  of  the  Eighth  Article. 
According  to  it,  there  are  associated  with  the  Church  in  this  life 
many  hypocrites  and  ungodly  persons — that  is,  her  empirical  organ- 
ization does  not  fully  correspond  with  her  internal  and  essential  na- 
ture. She  has  not  thus  far  attained  her  ideal  perfection.  This  re- 
sults mainly  from  the  foreign  elements  that  are  associated  with  her 
external  organization. 

The  Eighth  Article  seems  to  imply  that  this  will  continue  to  the 
end  of  the  Christian  dispensation.  It  says:  "In  this  life  there  re- 
main many  false  Christians  and  hypocrites,  and  also  open  sinners, 
among  the  pious."  The  Apology  admits  that  the  ungodly  may  even 
predominate  in  the  Church — that  since  the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  not 
yet  manifest,  the  ungodly  are,  in  this  life,  among  true  believers,  and 
in  the  Church — and  that,  as  among  a  mass  of  fish  there  is  a  mixture 
of  good  and  bad,  so  the  Church  here  below  is  concealed  among  the 
great  body  and  multitude  of  the  ungodly. 

This  point  is  more  directly  stated  in  the  last  condemnatory  clause 
of  the  Seventeenth  Article,  namely:  "They  also  condemn  others 
who  now  disseminate  the  Jewish  notions,  that  before  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead  the  pious  (German — "  the  holy  and  pious  alone  ")  will 
hold  the  government  of  the  world,  and  that  the  ungodly  will  be 
everywhere  oppressed."     (German — "  will  be  exterminated.") 

As  the  doctrine  of  the  millennium  belongs  more  properly  to  the 
Seventeenth  Article,  I  will  dismiss  this  thesis  with  one  remark. 
That  the  ideal  Church  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  as  also  of  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  includes,  especially,  the  harmony 
and  oneness  of  all  believers,  their  purity,  their  devotion  to  religion, 
the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  all   nations,   a   general  submission 


248  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  Christ  throughout  the  earth,  and  a  high  state  of  bhssful  enjoy- 
ment, is  evident  from  the  following  texts.  Is.  xi.  9;  xxxv.  8-iOJ 
Ixv.  16-25  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  13;  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20;  Mark  xvi.  16;  Dan. 

vii.  18,  27. 

VIII.  Thesis. 

Whenever  the  Necessity  exists,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  reform 
Herself — to  introchice  S2ich  Changes  in  Doctrine,  Cidtus  and  Gov- 
ernment, as  tvitl  enable  her  to  to  attain  most  successfully  her  Ideal 
Perfection. 

Whenever  the  Church  becomes  so  corrupt  that  instead  of  realiz- 
ing more  fully  her  ideal  perfection,  she  is  continually  departing 
from  that  ideal,  and  is  thus  failing  successfully  to  attain  the  design 
of  her  organization:  namely,  the  edification  of  believers  and  the 
conversion  of  sinners,  then  her  reformation  becomes  a  necessity. 
This  was  the  condition  of  the  Romish  Church  at  the  time  of  the 
Reformation. 

The  right  and  duty  of  reformation  grow  out  of  its  necessity  and 
the  sacred  trust  committed  to  the  Church  as  the  Innhaberinn  and 
Trdgerinn  of  the  means  of  grace,  according  to  thesis  third.  It  fol- 
lows also  from  theses  fifth  and  sixth,  in  the  latter  of  which  was 
shown  the  duty  of  removing  from  the  Church  all  those  foreign 
elements  which  endanger  her  existence  or  purity,  or  impede  her 
progress;  and  in  the  former,  the  same  duty  in  regard  to  immoral 
and  heretical  teachers.  But  if  the  excommunication  of  unworthy 
and  dangerous  members,  either  of  the  laity  or  clergy,  is  a  duty,  then 
much  more  is  it  a  duty  to  reform  the  Church  in  her  doctrines, 
cultus,  and  government,  when  these  themselves  encourage  or  con- 
nive at  heterodoxy  or  immorality.  This  was  the  ground  of  the 
Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

In  effecting  such  a  reformation,  the  Church  does  not  lose  her 
ri^ht  to  the  title  of  the  Christian  Church,  but  only  the  more  fully 
establishes  this  right.  If  a  corrupt  church  in  returning  to  a  pure 
gospel,  pure  sacraments,  and  an  evangelical  cultus  and  government, 
forfeits  the  right  to  the  title  of  the  Christian  Church,  then  no 
Christian  people  ever  possessed  such  right.  For  nothing  else  can 
establish  such  a  claim;  neither  the  antiquity  of  the  Church,  nor  an 
apostolical  succession,  even  if  it  could  be  satisfactorily  proved,  nor 
yet  a  perfect  oneness  in  doctrine,  cultus  and  government;  because 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  249 

all  these  might  exist,  and  yet  the  Church  be  corrupt  and  antag- 
onistic to  the  institutions  and  commands  of  Christ.  Against  the 
claim  of  the  pope,  founded  on  the  above  grounds,  that  the  Romish 
Church  alone  possessed  the  right  to  be  called  the  true  and  only 
Church,  and  that  the  Lutherans  had  forfeited  all  such  claim,  the 
Confessors  defended  themselves  in  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Articles 
of  the  Confession,  and  also  in  the  Apology.  In  the  latter,  they 
say:  "  Hence  we  draw  the  conclusion,  according  to  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, that  the  true  Christian  Church  consists  of  all  those  through- 
out the  world,  who  truly  believe  the  gospel  of  Christ,  and  have  the 
Holy  Spirit."  Again:  "The  Church,  as  St.  Paul  says,  i  Tim.  iii. 
15,  is  properly  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth."* 

Luther  says:  "The  true  Church  is  known  from  the  false,  in  this 
— the  true  Church  teaches  that  God  forgives  us  our  sins  freeh% 
and  alone  on  account  of  his  grace  and  mercy,  for  Christ's  sake, 
without  our  merits  or  works,  when  we  are  made  sensible  of  our 
sins  and  confess  them,  and  with  the  heart  firmly  believe  in  Christ; 
on  the  other  hand,  the  false  church  attributes  all  this  to  our  own 
merits  and  works,  and  teaches  us  to  retain  our  doubts. "f 

The  right  of  reformation  in  the  Church  being  thus  established, 
and  also  the  right,  when  reformed,  to  the  title  of  the  true  Christian 
Church,  the  question  presents  itself,  would  any  particular  Church, 
say  the  Lutheran,  or  any  part  of  it,  forfeit  the  right  to  retain  her 
own  name,  if  in  order  to  attain  more  fully  and  more  successfully 
the  standard  of  the  ideal  Church,  she  would  effect  a  reformation 
within  herself,  or  more  specifically,  if  she  would  believe  it  necessary 
to  adopt  her  Confession  merely  as  to  fundamental  correctness?  If 
the  title,  "  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,"  was  designed  to  indicate, 
when  it  was  assumed  and  accepted,  that  her  true  children  in  all 
coming  ages  must  receive  her  confessions  in  the  sense  in  which 
she  then  understood  them,  and  in  none  other,  or  cea$e  to  be  Evan- 
gelical Lutherans,  then  we  must  answer  our  question  in  the  affirma- 
tive. But  this  would  be  claiming  for  the  Reformers,  either  that 
they  could  not  err,  or  did  not  err,  in  the  preparation  of  our  Confes- 
sion. In  either  case,  it  virtually  claims  for  them,  either  ///  that 
specific  work,  or  at   least,  for  that  work,   infallibility.      It  is   also 

*Mull.  Symb.  Buch.,  Vol.  I.,  A.  C,  W.  151  {28),  pp.  157,  158;  and  VV.  149 
(20),  pp.  155,  156.     Henk.  Bk.  Cone,  pp.  221,  222,  220. 

t  Luth.  Werke,  Irr.,  Erl.,  1854,  V^ol.  59,  p.  136  (1199). 


250  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

virtually  saying  to  her  own  children  :  if  you,  in  the  exercise  of  your 
private  judgment,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  and  which 
we  claim  and  exercise  for  ourselves,  and  which  we  also  accord  to 
you,  should  come  to  the  settled  conviction  that  any  of  the  doctrines 
of  our  Confession  are  unscriptural,  even  in  non-fundamentals,  then 
you  forfeit  your  right  to  be  called  Evangelical  Lutheran — you  must 
seek  a  home  elsewhere:  or,  if  you  can  find  none  of  the  same  faith, 
you  must  set  up  for  yourselves,  or  you  must  not  avow  or  proclaim 
your  convictions.  But  if  the  Reformation  did  nothing  better  than 
this  for  Christendom,  then  it  is  an  abortion;  then  the  name  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  is  a  misnomer,  and  not  worthy  of  being  retained. 

Luther  desired  simply  to  be  called  a  Christian,  an  Evangelical 
Christian ;  and  the  Church  of  the  Reformation,  the  Evangelical 
Church, — thus  indicating  that  their  faith  was  the  pure  faith  of  the 
gospel,  the  pure  faith  of  the  apostles,  and  that  their  Church  was  the 
true  Christian  Church. 

The  Evangelical  Lutheran,  then,  claimed  to  be  the  true  Christian 
Church,  and  she  denied  all  human  infallibility,  and  established  for 
all  time  the  right  of  private  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures.  Add  to  this  Luther's  description,  already  given,  of  a 
true  and  false  church,  and  dare  we  deny  the  right  to  a  qualified  re- 
ception of  our  doctrines,  and  still  retain  the  name  of  the  true  Chris- 
tian Church,  if  in  such  qualification  we  continue  firmly  to  teach, 
"that  God  forgives  us  our  sins  freely,  and  alone  on  account  of  his 
grace  and  mercy,  for  Christ's  sake,  without  our  merits  or  works, 
when  we  are  made  sensible  of  our  sins,  and  confess  them,  and  with 
the  heart  firmly  believe  in  Christ  ?"  And,  if  thus  entitled  to  the 
name  of  the  true  Christian  Church,  how  can  it  involve  a  forfeiture 
of  the  name  of  Evangelical  Lutheran  ? 

But  it  may  be  said,  if  this  conclusion  is  legitimate,  then  all  ortho- 
dox Protestants  might  claim  the  title  of  Evangelical  Lutheran — 
then  we  might  as  well  all  be  one.  I  must  unhesitatingly  admit  the 
inference  ;  and  I  re-iterate  it — we  might  as  well  all  be  one ;  and  I 
will  add,  if  we  had  enough  of  the  spirit  of  our  Master,  so  that  we 
could  in  charity  tolerate  each  other's  doctrinal  differences,  we  might 
not  only  as  well,  but  much  better,  be  one. 

A   certain    Lutheran  divine,  not  of  the  General   Synod,  speaking  , 
of  the  members  of  various  Christian  denominations,  says  :  "Though 
they  have  not  all  the  same  forms  of  government,  and  the  same  cer- 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  25 1 

emonies,  yet  have  they  one  Lord.  Though  they  have  not  even  the 
same  doctrines  in  all  particulars,  yet  have  they  the  one  faith  and  the 
one  baptism,  if  they  be  Christians  at  all.  No  diversities  among 
them  can  break  the  oneness  of  the  Lord's  body." 

Also:  "All  the  baptized  who,  notwithstanding  their  faults,  cling 
sincerely  to  their  one  Lord  in  the  one  faith,  being  thus  daily  cleansed 
from  all  their  sins,  are  of  the  Church,  the  one  body.  Here  there  is 
unity  and  no  schism."  Again  :  "  Whoever  believes  is  in  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  is  a  child  of  the  Jerusalem  that  is  above,  the  mother 
of  us  all.  And  he  remains  in  this  unity,  notwithstanding  his  doc- 
trinal or  practical  errors,  so  long  as  he  continues  to  believe:  for  so 
long  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not  taken  away."  Once  more:  "The  Apos- 
tles' Creed  contains  a  summary  of  all  the  Christian  doctrines,  and 
whoever  believes  it,  has  the  whole  Christian  faith."* 

IX.  Thesis. 
Are  there  any  Circumstances  nndcr  zvJiich  it  zuoidd  be  the  Right  a?id 

Duty  of  Protestant  Christians  to  organize  a  nezv  Church  ? 

The  Church  was  organized  to  attain  a  specific  end.  We  have 
seen  that  whenever  she  fails  to  attain  that  end,  by  constantly  depart- 
ing from  her  ideal  perfection,  instead  of  approaching  more  nearly  to 
it,  there  exists  a  necessity  for  a  reformation  ;  and  also,  when  such 
necessity  exists,  the  right  and  duty  of  reformation  also  exist.  If 
now,  under  such  circumstances,  the  reformation  of  existing  churches 
is  impossible  or  impracticable,  there  is  no  choice  left  true  Christians 
but  to  organize  a  new  church,  or  rather,  to  reconstruct  the  Church 
itself  in  a  separate  and  distinct  organization.  It  is  not  only  their 
right — the  high  and  sacred  trust  committed  to  the  Church  makes  it 
their  bounden  duty. 

The  right  of  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation  to  the  title  of  true 
Christian  Churches,  depends  wholly  on  this  right  of  Christians, 
under  the  above  circumstances,  to  form  a  new  Church.  "  The 
Protestants  could  justify  their  separation  from  the  Romish  Church 
only  by  going  back  to  the  original  difference  between  the  inner 
communion  and  the  outer  organization,  and  by  distinguishing  be- 
tween the  kingdom  of  God  as  ideal,  and  its  imperfect  manifestation 
in  each  particular  Church."t 

*  Ev.  Rev.,  Vol.  VIII..  pp.  6-9. 

t  Hut.  Red.,  Loc.  XXI.,  De  Ecclesia,  p.  322. 


252  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

But  this  right  must  not  be  unnecessarily  exercised.  The  many 
sects  into  which  professing  Christians  are  divided,  show  that  it  has 
been  abused.  Christians  have  divided  on  the  mode  of  baptism,  on 
the  number  of  immersions,  on  the  question  whether  immersion 
should  be  performed  forwards  or  backwards,  on  the  cut  of  the  coat, 
on  the  choice  between  buttons  and  hooks  and  eyes — then  again  on 
singing  hymns  and  psalms,  and  even  on  Watts'  and  Rouse's  version 
of  the  Psalms.  Some  have  left  the  existing  churches  and  set  up 
for  themselves,  for  no  better  reason,  we  fear,  than  that  they  could 
not  carry  out  their  own  whims  and  fancies. 

When  now  we  consider  the  petition  of  Christ,  John  xvii.  20.  21, 
"Neither  pray  I  for  these  alone,"  etc.;  and  then,  also,  the  admonition 
of  St.  Paul,  I  Cor.  i.  10,"  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  name 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  etc.;  we  must  conclude  that  there  is  guilt 
somewhere — to  set  aside  such  a  prayer  and  such  an  admonition, 
without  the  most  weighty,  the  most  dire  necessity,  must  bring  upon 
the  criminal  guilt  of  no  ordinary  character. 

But  may  not  the  origin  of  some  of  these  sects  be  attributable  to 
the  then  existing  churches  ?  A  little  more  liberty  in  the  faith  out- 
side of  "  ruin  by  the  fall,  redemption  by  Christ,  and  renovation  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,"  and  insisting  a  little  more  on  genuine  conversion, 
holy  living,  and  greater  Christian  activity,  would  no  doubt  in  some 
instances  have  prevented  these  divisions — it  would  at  least  have  left 
not  even  a  pretence  for  them.  The  division  and  re-union  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  is  an  illustration  of  this  point.  In  short,  the 
guilt  rests  partly  with  those  separating  from  the  Church  and  organ- 
izing for  themselves,  and  partly  with  the  churches  from  which  they 
separated. 

That  there  should  be  more  toleration  in  the  Lutheran  Church,  we 
think  does  not  admit  of  a  doubt. 

Before  concluding,  I  will  give  the  views  of  Dr.  F.  V.  Reinhard, 
bearing  on  this  subject. 

In  an  anniversary  sermon  on  the  Reformation,  delivered  in  the 
year  181 2,  a  translation  of  which  may  be  found  in  volume  fifth  of 
the  Evangelical  Revleiv,  pp.  352-365,  he  gives  what  he  regards  as 
"  the  invisible  and  sacred  bonds  by  which  our  whole  Church  is 
united  ;"  "  bonds"  which,  he  says,  were  "woven  by  the  Reformation, 
and  which  will  hold  forever  what  they  have  bound  together." 

The  specific  bonds  of  union  which  he  discusses  are  thus  stated : 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  253 

"  Like  zeal  for  freedom  of  conscience;  a  common  subjection  to  the 
distinctive  authority  of  Scripture  ;  a  bond  of  faith  harmonizing  in  the 
great  leading  truths  of  the  Gospel ;  reciprocal  toleration  in  all  the 
rest ;  and  an  earnest  striving  after  every  species  of  perfection. 

In  discussing  the  third  bond — a  faith  harmonizing  in  the  great 
leading  truths  of  the  Gospel — he  presents  these  truths  in  detail,  and 
which  may  be  briefly  summed  up  thus:  one  God,  ruin  by  the  fall, 
redemption  by  Christ,  renovation  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  genuine  repen- 
tance, a  living  faith  in  Jesus,  purifying  the  heart  and  life,  fervent  love 
towards  God  and  men,  and  a  promise  of  immortality  and  eternal  life 
to  those  who  believe,  are  baptized,  confess  Jesus  publicly  and  at  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  remain  faithful  to  the  end  of  life. 

Reinhard  maintains  that  "  it  is  the  living  conviction  of  the  chief 
truths  of  the  Gospel" — and  he  refers  to  those  just  enumerated — 
which  Lutherans  hold  in  common,  that  has  held  us  together.  He 
then  adds  :  "  Their  conviction  is  rendered  yet  firmer  and  more  inward 
by  their  reciprocal  toleration  of  all  the  rest." 

His  just  and  judicious  remarks  under  this  head  I  cannot  omit. 

"That  the  Scripture,  in  addition  to  the  main  truths  of  the  gospel, 
embraces  much  that  may  give  occasion  to  conflicting  opinions;  that 
these  fundamental  truths  themselves  may  be  conceived  of  in  differ- 
ent ways,  when  they  are  developed  and  unfolded  completely;  that 
the  method  in  which  Scripture  is  examined  and  explained;  that  the 
history  of  the  Christian  Church  in  all  ages,  the  investigations  and 
discoveries  of  the  human  understanding,  the  present  position  of  the 
world,  and  the  condition  of  the  sciences;  that  all  these  in  a  Church 
like  ours,  where  everything  is  examined,  and  every  spring  of  knowl- 
edge freely  searched,  must  exert  the  most  varied  influence  on  the 
religious  opinions  of  its  members,  and  must  originate  an  incalculable 
diversity  in  their  views  and  convictions — this  fact  lies  clearly  before 
us,  and  the  experience  of  every  day  confirms  it.  But  this  diversity 
need  excite  no  solicitude;  it  relates  merely  to  minor  matters, 
and  cannot  prejudice  that  unity  of  spirit  in  which  we  abide  in  the 
grand  truths  of  the  gospel.  It  even  becomes  a  bond  of  peace,  and 
contributes  to  the  firmer  union  of  the  members  ot  our  church  one 
with  another.  For  every  man  feels  that  he  would  countenance  an 
entrenchment  on  his  own  freedom,  and  expose  it  to  an  unrighteous 
restriction,  if  in  things  in  which  we  can  and  may  rightfully  differ,  he 
would  attempt  to  prescribe  and  force  upon  others  his  own  way  of 


254  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

thinking.  Should  he  not  allow  every  one  to  partake  in  that  freedom 
which  with  so  much  justice  he  claims  for  himself?  Shall  not  the 
pressing  need  of  fraternal  forbearance  and  of  complete  freedom  of 
conscience  unite  our  members  the  more  firmly  in  proportion  as  this 
privilege  is  with  difficulty  found  elsewhere?  Does  not  our  Church 
become  a  firmer  whole  by  this  her  peculiar  forbearance,  in  propor- 
tion as  she  is  incapable  of  being  disturbed  by  controversies  in  lesser 
matters?  That  such  controversies  have  arisen  in  abundance,  is  true. 
Even  among  us  there  have  not  been  wanting  at  all  times  short- 
sighted zealots  who  confounded  the  non-essential  with  the  essential ; 
who  neither  possessed  nor  recognized  the  tolerant  spirit  of  our 
church ;  men  who  would  have  been  capable  of  forcing  on  the  Church 
their  views,  which  were  often  completely  false.  But  however  much 
this  blind  zeal  at  times  disturbed  the  tranquillity  of  our  church,  it 
has  never  been  able  to  dissolve  her  connection,  and  endanger  her 
perpetuity;  that  reciprocal  forbearance  to  which  she  pledged  her 
members,  has  remained  a  sacred  bond  which  rendered  their  con- 
nection indissoluble." 

Well  had  it  been  for  our  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  had  these 
principles  and  sentiments  always  been  heartily  embraced  and  prac- 
tically applied. 

That  Reinhard  places  the  peculiar  views  of  our  Confession  on  the 
sacraments,  as  baptismal  regeneration,  and  the  real  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  eucharist,  among  the  truths  concerning  which  the 
reciprocal  toleration  is  allowed  in  the  Lutheran  Church,  is  evident 
from  the  above  extracts,  as  also  from  his  "  Dogmatik."  Concerning 
fundamental  and  non-fundmental  Articles,  he  holds  that  those  alone 
are  absolutely  fundamental  which  constitute  religion  in  distinction 
from  theology.  He  says:  "In  regard  to  those  propositions  which 
belong  to  religion,  nearly  all  the  parties  are  in  the  main  agreed. 
They  differ,  however,  in  the  manner  of  representing  these  funda- 
mental principles.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  more  definite  and  critical 
explanations  of  the  simple  propositions  of  religion,  and  then  main- 
taining that  these  alone  contain  the  truth,  such  divisions  could  not 
have  originated.  It  is  easy,  however,  to  see  that,  in  consequence 
of  the  activity  of  the  human  mind,  such  explanations  were  unavoid- 
able, but,  also,  that  they  would  result  in  no  injury  to  Christianity,  if 
the  different  parties  would  only  tolerate  each  other  in  a  brotherly 
spirit,  which  religion  everywhere  makes  one  of  its  first  duties."* 

*  Dogmatik,  pp.  571,  583,  584,  604,  36,  23. 


THE    CHURCH    AS    IT    IS.  255 

If  on  our  peculiarities  on  the  sacraments  and  a  few  other  points 
all  Lutherans  could  only  heartily  consent  to  a  full  Reinhardian  tol- 
eration— or,  going  back  to  an  undisputed  authority — to  die  von  Lu- 
ther gege^i  MelancJitJion  bciviesene  Toleratiz,  how  soon  might  our 
divisions  be  healed,  and  what  a  mighty  power  would  we  soon  be  in 
;his  land  and  in  the  world ! 


ARTICLE  IX. 


BAPTISM. 

By  F.  W.  CONRAD,  D.  D. 


THIS  Article,  according  to  the  German  text  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, reads  thus : 

"  Respecting  Baptism  it  is  taught,  that  it  is  necessary ;  that  grace  is  offered 
through  it ;  and  that  children  ought  to  be  baptized,  who,  through  such  Baptism, 
are  presented  unto  God,  and  become  acceptable  unto  him.  Therefore  the  Ana- 
baptists are  condemned,  who  teach  that  Infant  Baptism  is  improper." 

According  to  the  Latin  text  of  the  Confession,  it  is  as  follows: 

"Of  Baptism  they  teach  that  it  is  necessary  to  salvation,  and  that  by  Bap- 
tism the  grace  of  God  is  offered,  and  that  children  are  to  be  baptized,  who  by 
Baptism,  being  offered  to  God,  are  received  into  God's  favor.  They  condemn 
the  Anabaptists,  who  allow  not  the  Baptism  of  children,  and  affirm  that  chil- 
dren are  saved  without  Baptism." 

I.     Its  Names. 

Names,  when  arbitrarily  given,  have  no  reference  to  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  object  designated  by  them  ;  but  when  naturally  employed, 
they  are  designed  to  express  some  characteristic  of  the  person  or 
institution  to  which  they  are  applied.  The  name  Baptism  was  em- 
ployed by  Jesus  Christ  and  his  Apostles  in  a  natural  sense.  The 
generic  meaning  of  the  Greek  word  Baptisinos,  which  has  been  in- 
troduced into  our  English  version  without  undergoing  a  translation, 
is  that  of  a  wasliing,  and  it  is  applied  to  Baptism  by  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers,  because  it  is  a  "  washing  of  water  by  the  word,"  even 
"a  washing  of  regeneration."  And  in  like  manner  do  the  Confes- 
sors of  the  Lutheran  Church  designate  Baptism  as  a  sacrament,  a 
Christian  ceremony,  a  holy  ordinance,  a  divine  testimony,  because 
256 


BAPTISM.  257 

each  of  these  terms  represents  some  characteristic  found  in  the  con- 
stitution of  Baptism. 

II.     Its  Institutiox. 

Baptism  was  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ.  The  words  upon  which 
it  was  founded  by  him,  are  recorded  by  Matthew  and  Mark  as  fol- 
lows :  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  "  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."     Matt,  xxviii.  19;   Mark  xvi.  15,  16. 

Baptism,  not  having  been  devised  by  man,  but  instituted  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  will  of  God,  must,  therefore,  be  regarded  not  as 
a  human  device,  but  as  a  divine  institution. 

III.    Its  Constituent  Parts. 

As  in  nature,  things  are  constituted  by  the  combination  of  ele- 
ments, so  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  institutions  are  formed  by  the 
appropriation  and  union  of  natural  and  supernatural  elements.  The 
natural  element  introduced  into  the  constitution  of  Baptism,  is  water; 
the  supernatural  element,  the  Word  of  God.  "For,"  as  the  Larger 
Catechism  declares,  "if  the  word  is  separated  from  the  water,  it  is 
not  different  from  that  used  for  ordinary  purposes,  and  it  may  well 
be  styled  a  common  ablution;  but  when  it  is  connected  with  the 
word  as  God  has  ordained  it,  it  is  a  sacrament,  and  it  is  called  Chris- 
tian Baptism."  And  with  this  agrees  the  definition  of  Baptism  given 
in  the  Smalcald  Articles :  "  Baptism  is  nothing  else  than  the  word 
of  God  connected  with  water,  commanded  by  his  institution.  *  *  " 
As  Augustine  also  says:  "The  word  being  added  to  the  element,  it 
becomes  a  sacrament." 

The  wisdom  of  God  is  manifested  in  nature,  by  adapting  certain 
elements  for  combination,  and  the  same  wisdom  is  exhibited  by  the 
adaptation  of  water  and  the  word  to  form  a  sacramental  union.  To 
the  accomplishment  of  this  end,  it  was  necessary  that  water,  which, 
as  a  natural  element,  was  unfitted  to  enter  into  combination  with  the 
word  as  a  supernatural  element,  should  be  so  changed  b)-  its  appro- 
priation to  a  religious  end,  as  to  be  adapted  for  a  union  with  the 
word  in  the  sphere  of  the  supernatural.  This  adaptation  the  water 
receives  through  its  use  in  the  administration  of  Baptism.     In  this 


258  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

manner  it  becomes  an  efficacious  sign,  a  vehicle  of  truth,  "a  visible 
word,"  analogous  in  its  nature  to  the  written  word.  While  the 
water,  therefore,  as  a  sign  or  symbol,  reveals  the  depravity  of  man, 
and  the  necessity  of  regeneration,  the  word  enforces  the  command 
of  God,  and  presents  the  promise  of  pardon,  grace  and  salvation. 

"  For,"  says  Luther  in  his  sermon  on  Holy  Baptism,  "  in  order 
that  Baptism  may  be  and  be  called  a  sacrament,  it  is  necessary,  first 
of  all,  that  some  external,  tangible  sign  or  substance  be  employed, 
through  which  God  deals  visibly  with  us,  so  that  we  may  be  assured 
of  his  operation.  For  without  some  external  sign  or  medium,  God 
will  not  operate  upon  us  merely  by  a  deeply  secret  inspiration,  or  a 
peculiar  divine  revelation.  But  the  external  work  and  sign  will 
accomplish  nothing  at  all,  if  his  word  is  not  added,  through  which 
the  sign  becomes  mighty,  and  we  perceive  what  God  is  accomplish- 
ing in  us  by  this  sign.  But  the  divine  command  also  must  be 
united  to  both  these,  in  order  that  we  may  become  assured  of  his 
will  and  work  in  this  sign  and  word.  And  they  should  be  viewed 
in  immediate  connection  with  each  other,  and  not  be  severed  and 
separated,  since  in  union  with  each  other  they  constitute  a  correct 
Baptism." 

IV.     Its  Administrator. 

Baptism,  in  order  that  it  may  answer  the  end  of  its  institution, 
must  be  administered,  that  is,  the  words  of  the  institution  must  be 
spoken,  and  the  water  applied  to  the  person  presented  for  Baptism, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
An  administrator  becomes,  therefore,  indispensable,  and  God  has 
instituted  the  holy  ministry  through  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  authoriz- 
ing them  to  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,  and  to  baptize  all 
who  believed  in  his  name.  Although  Baptism  is  a  church  ordi- 
nance, which  is  to  be  administered  by  the  Church,  and  through 
which  members  are  initiated  into  the  Church,  nevertheless,  the  au- 
thority to  administer  it  has  not  been  conferred  upon  every  believer 
connected  with  a  Christian  congregation,  but  upon  the  minister 
duly  called  and  installed  as  its  pastor.  As  Christ  did  not  baptize 
personally,  but  through  his  Apostles,  so  does  the  Church  not  bap- 
tize directly  through  its  members,  but  representatively  through  its 
minister,  as  its  divinely  appointed  and  ordained  head. 


BAPTISM.  259 

V.     Its  Validity. 

The  validity  of  Baptism  depends  upon  its  essential  characteristics, 
and  not  upon  its  accidental  concomitants.  To  the  former  belong 
its  constituent  parts,  water  and  the  word  of  God,  administered  by 
an  authorized  minister,  according  to  the  command  of  Christ;  to  the 
latter  belong  the  character  of  the  administrator,  the  mode  of  apply- 
ing the  water,  and  the  state  of  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  recipient. 
When  thus  administered.  Baptism  is  clothed  with  the  name,  word, 
authority  and  power  of  God,  and  is  always  valid,  whether  the 
preacher  who  administers  it  be  pious  or  not  pious,  whether  the 
water  be  applied  to  the  person  by  pouring  or  sprinkling,  or  the 
person  be  applied  to  the  water  by  immersion,  or  whether  the  person 
receiving  it  be  a  child  or  an  adult,  a  believer  or  a  deceived  unbe- 
liever. Baptism  ought,  therefore,  never  to  be  repeated.  The 
intrinsic  nature  and  power  of  the  word  are  not  destroyed  by  the 
character  of  the  preacher,  the  manner  of  its  presentation,  and  the 
non-reception  by  the  hearer,  but  remains,  according  to  its  divine 
constitution,  quick  and  powerful;  and  the  same  is  true  of  Baptism. 
Accordingly,  Luther  says  in  the  Larger  Catechism:  "Baptism  does 
not  become  wrong  on  this  account  (whether  the  person  baptized 
believes  or  does  not  believe),  but  all  depends  upon  the  word  and 
command  of  God.  Now  this  is,  indeed,  a  nice  point;  but  it  is 
founded  upon  the  assertion,  that  Baptism  is  nothing  else  than  water 
and  the  word  of  God  intimately  united;  that  is,  when  the  word  is 
connected  with  the  water,  then  Baptism  is  right,  although  the 
individual  be  destitute  of  faith  at  the  time  of  his  Baptism;  for  my 
faith  does  not  make,  but  receive  Baptism.  *  *  Therefore  Baptism 
ever  continues  valid.  *  *  But  no  one  is  permitted  to  sprinkle 
us  with  water  again;  for,  if  a  person  permit  himself  to  be  sunk  into 
water  a  hundred  times,  it  would  still  be  no  more  than  one  Baptism; 
this  work,  however,  continues  and  the  signification  is  permanent." 

VL     Its  Mode. 

The  mode  of  Baptism  docs  not  belong  to  its  substance,  but  to  its 
accidents;  and  hence.  Baptism  may  be  performed  by  either  sprink- 
ling, pouring  or  immersion.  There  being  no  difference  of  opinion 
between  the  Confessors  and  the  Romanists,  concerning  the  mode  of 
Baptism,  the  subject  was  not  introduced  into  their  Confession;  and 


2  60  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  it  was  regarded  of  minor  importance,  it  was  referred  to  only  in- 
cidentally, in  other  portions  of  the  Symbolical  Books.  The  follow- 
ing quotations  from  the  Larger  Catechism  present  such  incidental 
allusions  to  the  mode  of  Baptism  : 

"Baptism  is  not  our  work, but  God's.  For  thou  must  distinguish 
between  the  Baptism  which  God  gives,  and  that  which  the  keeper 
of  a  bath-house  gives.  But  God's  work  to  be  saving  does  not 
exclude  faith,  but  demands  it,  for  without  faith  it  cannot  be  grasped. 
For  in  the  mere  fact  that  thou  hast  had  water  poured  on  thee,  thou 
hast  not  so  received  Baptism  as  to  be  useful  to  thee;  but  it  profits 
thee  if  thou  art  baptized  with  the  design  of  obeying  God's  command 
and  institution,  and  in  God's  name  of  receiving  in  the  water  the  sal- 
vation promised.  This  neither  the  hand  nor  the  body  can  effect, 
but  the  heart  must  believe."  "  We  should  say,  I  am  baptized,  there- 
fore the  promise  of  salvation  is  given  me  for  soul  and  body." 

"For  to  this  end  these  two  things  were  done  in  Baptism,  that  the 
body,  which  can  only  receive  the  water,  is  wet  by  pouring,  and  that 
in  addition,  the  word  is  spoken  that  the  soul  may  receive  it.  The 
act  (of  Baptism)  consists  in  our  being  put  in  connection  with  the 
water,  and  after  its  passing  over  us,  in  being  withdrawn  from  it 
again.  These  two,  our  being  put  in  connection  with  the  water,  and 
being  withdrawn  from  it  again,  signify  the  efficacy  and  work  of  Bap- 
tism, which  are  nothing  else  but  the  mortification  of  the  old  Adam, 
and  afterwards  the  rearing  of  the  new  man." 

These  are  the  words  of  Luther.  In  the  first  quotation,  he  refers 
manifestly  to  the  mode  of  Baptism  by  pouring,  and  in  the  second  no 
less  explicity  to  that  of  immersion.  From  these  declarations,  as  well 
as  from  his  translations,  liturgies  and  other  writings,  it  is  demon- 
strable that  he  believed  sprinkling  and  pouring  to  be  a  valid  and 
scriptural  mode  of  Baptism;  that  at  a  certain  period  of  his  life  he 
expressed  a  preference  for  immersion,  but  that  he  never  regarded  it 
as  necessary,  and  that  he  cannot,  therefore,  be  truthfully  claimed  as 
an  immersionist.  While  Baptism  was  commonly  administered  in 
Europe  during  the  sixteenth  century  by  pouring  and  sprinkling,  as 
well  as  by  immersion,  all  over  Germany  it  was  performed,  says 
Bugenhagen,  "by  pouring  the  water  over  the  head  and  shoulders  of 
the  child."  And  pouring  and  sprinkling  have  been  adopted  as  the 
preferable  mode  by  the  Lutheran  Church  in  all  ages  and  lands. 


BAPTISM.  261 

VII.    Its  Subjects. 

That  adult  believers  are  proper  subjects  of  Baptism  was  taken  for 
granted  by  the  Confessors  as  the  doctrine  held  by  the  Church  uni- 
versal; and  that  it  ought  also  to  be  administered  to  children,  they 
declare  in  the  Article  of  their  Confession  under  consideration.  That 
children  are  proper  subjects  of  Baptism  is  demonstrable  from  the 
following  arguments,  to  most  of  which  reference  is  made  in  the  Sym- 
bolical Books. 

1.  From  the  command  of  Christ.  The  word,  as  one  of  the  essen- 
tial elements  of  Baptism,  authorizes  the  Apostles  to  baptize  "  all 
nations."  The  command  thus  issued  by  Jesus  Christ,  is  not  specific, 
directing  ministers  of  the  gospel  to  baptize  men,  women  or  children, 
but  generic,  commissioning  them  to  baptize  "  all  nations,"  and,  there- 
fore, it  includes  children  as  well  as  adults.  While  the  command  to 
baptize  is  unrestricted  to  either  age  or  sex,  it  is,  nevertheless,  limited 
in  its  application  by  the  qualifications  demanded  as  conditions  of  its 
reception.  The  qualifications  thus  required  of  adults,  are  repentance 
and  faith;  and  the  requisition  for  the  baptism  of  children  is,  that  at 
least  one  of  the  parents  be  a  believer  in  Christ.  These  conditions 
are  presented  in  other  portions  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  were 
required  by  the  Apostles  in  the  administration  of  Baptism,  both  to 
adult  believers  and  the  children  of  their  households. 

2.  From  the  constitution,  unity  and  perpetuity  of  tlie  C/iurch.  God, 
in  the  original  constitution  of  his  Church,  established  infant  mem- 
bership, and  instituted  circumcision  as  the  rite  through  which  chil- 
dren were  t6  be  admitted  into  it.  At  first,  membership  was  mainly 
confined  to  the  Jews,  but,  "  in  the  fulness  of  time,"  the  same  privi- 
lege was  conferred  upon  the  Gentiles.  In  the  accomplishment  of 
this  end,  God  did  not  organize  a  new  Church,  but  simply  extended 
the  ecclesiastical  advantages  of  the  Jewish  Church  to  all  the  Gentile 
nations.  He  did  not  pluck  up  the  old  "olive  tree,"  but  simply 
broke  off  some  of  "the  natural  branches,"  and  then  cut  off  branches 
from  the  wild  "olive  tree,"  and  grafted  them  "  into  the  good  olive 
tree"  in  their  stead,  in  order  that  they  might  become  partakers  of 
"  the  root  and  fatness  "  thereof.  Christ,  the  Chief  Shepherd,  did  not 
establish  a  new  fold,  neither  did  he  confine  his  pastoral  supervision 
to  the  sheep  of  the  Jewish  fold  ;  but  realizing  that  he  had  other 
sheep,  which  were  not  of  that  fold,  he  made  the  necessary  provision 

18 


262  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

for  bringing  them  in,  in  order  that  there  might  be  and  remain,  as 
there  had  been,  "but  one  fold  and  one  Shepherd."  In  other  words, 
Christ  did  not  make  such  radical  changes  in  the  New  Testament 
dispensation  as  to  constitute  a  new  Church.  He  did  not  restrict 
church  membership  to  adults,  and  thereby  exclude  children  from  its 
rights  and  blessings,  secured  to  them  by  covenant  and  promise  in 
all  generations.  Baptism  was  simply  substituted  for  circumcision, 
as  the  initiatory  rite  of  the  Church;  it  became  the  sign  of  the  same 
promise  and  the  seal  of  the  same  covenant ;  it  was  administered  to 
parents  and  children  by  the  Apostles,  as  circumcision  had  been  to 
Jewish  fathers  and  their  male  children;  and,  hence.  Baptism  is  ex- 
pressly declared  by  the  inspired  writers,  to  be  "  the  circumcision 
made  without  hands,"  even  "  the  circumcision  of  Christ." 

"Through  Baptism,"  says  the  Larger  Catechism,  "we  are  first 
taken  into  the  community  of  Christians  and  of  the  Christian  Church. 
If  infant  Baptism  were  wrong  hitherto,  down  to  the  present  day, 
there  could  not  have  been  a  Christian  on  earth.  Now,  since  God 
confirms  Baptism  by  the  communication  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  as  was 
truly  the  case  in  some  of  the  Fathers,  as  St.  Bernard,  Gerson,  John 
Huss,  and  others  who  were  baptized  in  their  infancy;  and  as  the 
holy  Christian  Church  cannot  discontinue  until  the  end  of  the 
world,  it  must  indeed  be  acknowledged,  that  such  Baptism  of  chil- 
dren is  pleasing  to  God.  For  God  cannot  be  against  himself,  or 
favor  falsehood  and  knavery,  or  grant  his  grace  and  Spirit  to  this 
end.  *  *  For  this  article:  I  believe  in  a  holy,  Christian  Church, 
the  communion  of  saints,  can  neither  be  withdrawn  from  us  nor 
overthrown." 

The  logical  force  of  this  argument  may  be  illustrated  by  reference 
to  the  relation  of  the  common  and  statute  laws  of  the  State.  The 
common  law  confers  general  rights  and  privileges ;  the  statute  law 
repeals  and  limits  them.  The  plaintiff  having  established  his  right 
to  a  certain  privilege  by  the  common  law,  his  claim  cannot  be  an- 
nulled, unless  the  defendant  proves  that  the  right  in  dispute  has  been 
repealed  by  express  provision  of  the  statute  law.  In  like  manner 
does  the  Old  Testament  establish  church  membership,  and  confer 
its  privileges  upon  children.  Now,  unless  the  New  Testament,  by 
express  provision,  repeals  the  right  conferred  upon  children  and 
restricts  the  privilege  of  church  membership  to  adults,  their  claim 
to  all  its  advantages  remains  in  full  force.     It  was  entirely  unneces- 


BAPTISM.  263 

sary,  therefore,  that  Christ  should  institute  infant  membership  and 
command  his  Apostles  to  baptize  children.  But  if  it  was  his  design 
to  deprive  children  of  the  blessings  conferred  upon  them  from  the 
days  of  Abraham,  it  was  indispensable  that  he  should  do  this  by  giv- 
ing specific  directions  to  that  effect,  and  enforcing  them  by  adequate 
reasons.  But  as  he  gave  no  such  command,  his  Apostles  regarded 
the  claims  of  children  to  membership  in  his  Church  as  valid,  and 
uniformly  baptized  the  heads  of  families,  who  became  believers,  to- 
gether with  their  households. 

3.  From  the  loiity  and  perpetuity  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace,  zvith  all 
its  promised  blessings.  God  originally  instituted  a  covenant  with 
Abraham  and  his  posterity,  in  the  words  following,  to  wit:  "  I  will 
establish  my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and  thy  seed  after  thee 
in  their  generations,  for  an  everlasting  covenant,  to  be  a  God  to  thee 
and  thy  seed  after  thee."  Gen.  xvii.  7.  Into  this  covenant,  God 
commanded  the  children  of  Israel,  in  all  their  tribes  and  with  all 
their  children,  to  enter,  from  generation  to  generation.  Deut.  xxix. 
9.  The  token  of  this  covenant  was  circumcision,  and  the  divine 
direction  was  given  that  every  man  child  among  them  should  be 
circumcised.  Gen.  xvii.  10.  The  promises  connected  with  this 
covenant  embraced  a  numerous  posterity,  the  land  of  Canaan,  the 
privileges  of  church  membership,  the  Messiah,  and  all  the  blessings 
of  redemption.  These  blessings  were  sealed  by  circumcision,  and 
forfeited  by  its  neglect.  "  Every  man  child  who  is  not  circumcised, 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  his  people  ;  he  hath  broken  ni)'  cove- 
nant."    Gen.  xvii.  14. 

From  all  the  references  made  by  the  inspired  Apostles  to  the  cov- 
enant made  with  Abraham,  the  following  propositions  are  clearly 
established:  That  this  covenant  was  not  designed  to  be  temporary, 
but  "  everlasting,"  and  hence,  it  has  not  been  annulled,  but  remains 
in  full  force.  Gal.  iii.  17.  That  the  heathen,  the  Gentiles,  as  well 
as  his  natural  posterity,  became  alike  the  seed  and  children  of  Abra- 
ham, of  the  covenant,  and  of  the  promise  through  faith.  That  the 
promise,  embraced  in  the  covenant,  "that  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  should  be  blessed  in  him,"  included  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  Gospel  with  all  the  blessings  of  grace  a«d  redemption. 
That,  as  the  natural  seed  of  Abraham  received  the  sign  of  circum- 
cision, as  the  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  so  did  the  spiritual 
seed  of  Abraham  receive  the  sign   of  Baptism,  as  the  seal  of  the 


264  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

same  righteousness  of  faith.  Gal.  iii.  27,  29;  Rom.  iv.  ii.  That 
all  believers,  as  Abraham's  seed,  are  "  heirs  according  to  the  prom- 
ise," which  pertains  to  them  and  their  children,  and  to  as  many  as 
the  Lord  our  God  shall  call.  Gal.  iii.  29;  Acts  ii.  39.  And  that, 
accordingly,  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  as  soon  as  they  became  be- 
lievers, were  called  upon  to  be  baptized,  together  with  their  children. 
Acts  ii.  38,  39.  Now,  as  the  covenant  of  grace,  in  the  Jewish  dis- 
pensation, embraced  children;  as  the  promise  connected  with  it  had 
reference  to  children  ;  as  circumcision,  the  token  of  it,  was  applied 
to  children  ;  as  the  blessings  sealed  by  it  were  conferred  upon  chil- 
dren, it  follows,  that  as  the  covenant,  the  promise  and  the  blessings 
remain  the  same.  Baptism,  the  rite  which  confirms  the  covenant  and 
seals  its  promised  blessings  in  the  Christian  dispensation,  ought  to 
be  applied  to  the  same  subjects,  namely,  to  parents  and  children. 
And  as  the  substitution  of  Baptism  for  circumcision  did  not  annul 
the  covenant,  nor  render  its  promise  of  none  effect,  neither  did  it 
confine  its  blessings  to  adults  and  withhold  them  from  children. 

The  strength  of  the  argument  and  the  weakness  of  the  objection 
to  it,  based  upon  the  substitution  of  Baptism  for  circumcision,  may 
be  illustrated  by  reference  to  the  amendment  of  a  constitution. 
Suppose  that  by  the  old  constitution  of  a  state,  certain  preroga- 
tives should  be  conferred  upon  every  naturalized  adult  citizen  as 
well  as  upon  his  children — say,  the  right  of  voting  and  holding 
office  upon  the  adult,  and  the  right  of  free  education  and  moral  cul- 
ture upon  the  children — and  that  these  prerogatives  should  be  con- 
firmed according  to  a  prescribed  ceremony.  This  constitution,  as 
amended,  makes  no  change  either  in  the  conditions  required,  or  in 
the  prerogatives  conferred  by  naturalization,  but  provides  for  a 
change  in  the  ceremony  of  ratification.  The  substitution  of  one 
form  of  ratification  for  another,  could  manifestly  in  no  wise  affect 
the  proper  subjects  of  naturalization,  nor  limit  the  prerogatives 
granted  thereby.  These  would  remain  as  secure  to  the  children  as 
to  their  parents.  The  Old  Testament  confers  certain  ecclesiastical 
prerogatives  upon  parents  and  children,  and  confirms  them  by  a  re- 
ligious ceremony,  circumcision.  The  New  Testament  nowhere 
either  restricts  or  annuls  the  rights  and  privileges  confirmed  to 
parents  and  their  children  by  the  Old  Testament.  It  simply  sets 
aside  circumcision  and  substitutes  Baptism  as  the  more  significant 
and  appropriate  mode  of  initiating  believers  and  their  households 


BAPTISM.  265 

into  one  holy  Church  of  the  Hving  God,  and  of  seah'nf^  to  them 
the  blessings  promised  in  the  covenant  of  grace  and  redemption. 
The  substitution  of  Baptism  for  circumcision  must,  therefore,  be 
regarded  as  simply  a  ceremonial  arrangement,  effecting  no  radical 
change  in  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  the  persons  entitled  to 
membership,  or  the  prerogatives  conferred  upon  them  by  covenant 
and  promise. 

4.  From  the  instructions  and  example  of  Christ.  "Then  were 
there  brought  unto  him  little  children,  that  he  should  put  his  hands 
on  them  and  pray;  and  the  disciples  rebuked  them.  But  Jesus 
said,  Suffer  little  children,  and  forbid  them  not  to  come  unto  me, 
for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  he  laid  his  hands  on 
them."  Matt.  xix.  13-15.  Mark  adds,  "And  he  took  them  up  in 
his  arms,  put  his  hands  upon  them  and  blessed  them."  "And  he 
took  a  child  and  set  him  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  when  he  had 
taken  him  in  his  arms  he  said  unto  them,  Whosoever  shall  receive 
one  of  such  children  in  my  name,  receiveth  me,  and  whosoever 
shall  receive  me,  receiveth  not  me,  but  him  that  sent  me."  Mark 
ix.  36,  37.  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the 
kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child,  shall  in  no  wise  enter  therein." 
Luke  xviii.  17.  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Except  ye  be  converted 
and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  heaven."     See  also  Matt,  xviii.  10,  14. 

In  these  passages,  the  opinions  and  instructions  of  Christ  con- 
cerning little  children  are  given,  and  the  manner  in  which  he  treated 
them,  and  desired  that  his  disciples  should  treat  them,  are  set  forth. 
He  regarded  them  as  among  the  lost,  whom  he  came,  according  to 
the  will  of  his  Father,  to  save  from  perishing.  He  warned  all  against 
despising  them,  rebuked  those  who  forbade  them  to  come  to  him, 
and  declared  that  "  their  angels  did  always  behold  the  face  of  his 
father  which  is  in  heaven."  He  received  them,  took  them  in  his 
arms,  laid  his  hands  on  them,  and  imparted  his  blessing  to  them. 
Created  by  him,  and  redeemed  by  his  blood,  he  claimed  them  as 
his  own,  opened  the  door  of  his  kingdom  and  invited  them  to  come 
in,  directed  parents  to  bring  them  to  him,  and  instructed  his  Apostles 
to  receive  them  in  his  name.  As  an  incentive  to  obedience,  he  an- 
nounced that  those  who  receive  such  little  ones  in  his  name,  do 
thereby  receive  both  him  and  the  Father  that  sent  him.  And  as  a 
consequence  of  these  truths,  he  positively  affirms,  that  unless  men  be 


266  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

converted  and  become  as  little  children,  and  thus  receive  Christ  and 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  they  shall  in  no  wise  enter  therein,  because  of 
such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add,  that 
through  Infant  Baptism  the  views  and  directions  of  Christ  in  regard 
to  little  children  are  carried  out,  and  his  example  and  that  of  his 
Apostles  in  their  treatment  of  them  imitated ;  while  the  sentiments  and 
practice  of  those  who  reject  Infant  Baptism  appear  in  striking  con- 
trast therewith. 

5.  From  the  practice  of  Household  Baptism  by  the  Apostles.  Bap- 
tism was  not  first  instituted  by  John  the  Baptist,  and  afterwards 
adopted  by  Christ,  as  the  initiatory  rite  of  his  Church,  but  it  origi- 
nated among  the  Jews,  and  was  practiced  by  them  ages  before  in 
the  reception  of  proselytes  from  among  the  heathen.  Maimonides 
testifies  that  Baptism  was  already  practiced  in  the  wilderness  before 
the  giving  of  the  law;  that  proselytes  were  thus  made  to  Judaism 
in  the  days  of  Solomon  and  David;  and  that  the  children  of  the 
proselytes  were  baptized  as  well  as  their  parents.  And  Lightfoot, 
the  greatest  of  the  old  rabbinical  scholars,  says :  "  The  baptizing  of 
infants  was  a  thing  as  commonly  known  and  as  commonly  used 
before  John's  coming,  and  at  the  time  of  his  coming  and  subse- 
quently, as  any  thing  holy  that  was  used  among  the  Jews;  and  they 
were  as  familiarly  acquainted  with  Infant  Baptism  as  they  were  with 
Infant  Circumcision." 

Under  such  circumstances,  it  is  manifest  that  the  Apostles,  being 
Jews,  with  their  knowledge  of  the  establishment  of  infant  member- 
ship in  the  Church,  and  the  practice  of  infant  Baptism  prevalent 
among  them  before  their  eyes,  would  continue  the  reception  of 
children  into  the  Church  by  Baptism,  unless  they  were  prohibited 
from  doing  so  in  so  many  words  by  Christ  himself  And  as  no 
such  prohibition  was  given  by  him,  they  continued  the  practice  of 
baptizing  the  children  of  all  parents  who  professed  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ.  Accordingly  it  is  expressly  mentioned  by  Luke,  that 
Lydia,  as  soon  as  her  heart  was  opened,  so  that  she  attended  to  the 
thmgs  which  were  spoken  by  Paul,  "was  baptized  and  her  house- 
hold;" and  that  when  the  jailor  at  Philippi  believed  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  "he  and  all  his  were  baptized  straightway;"  and  Paul 
states  that  he  "baptized  also  the  household  of  Stephanus."  In  this 
manner,  beHeving  parents  and  their  children  became  ecclesiastical 
households,   or   Christian   churches.      There   was   such   a   Church 


BAPTISM.  267 

organized  in  the  house  of  Philemon  (Phil.  i.  2),  in  the  house  of 
Nymphas  (Col.  iv.  15),  and  in  the  house  of  Aquilla  and  Priscilla 
(Rom.  xvi.  5).  These  churches  were  designated  by  the  name  of 
the  father  of  the  family,  and  called  his  "  house."  The  "  house  of 
Stephanus"  and  the  "house  of  Onesiphorus"  were  constituted 
ecclesiastical  households  or  Christian  churches  through  Infant 
Baptism,  as  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  In  other  words,  the 
Apostles  practiced  household  Baptism  in  the  organization  and 
government  of  Christian  congregations,  both  among  the  Jews  and 
the  Gentiles. 

6.  From  the  History  of  Infant  Baptism  in  the  Christian  Church. 
Infant  Baptism  must  either  be  a  human  invention,  or  a  divine 
institution.  If  it  be  a  human  invention,  it  must  have  had  an  in- 
ventor; it  must  have  been  introduced  at  a  certain  period  by  some 
one,  and  history  must  have  recorded  his  name,  the  time  when  the 
innovation  was  introduced,  and  the  process  through  which  his 
sentiments  and  practice  became  universal  in  the  primitive  church. 
But  the  pages  of  ecclesiastical  history  contain  no  account  of  its 
introduction.  No  such  name  can  be  found,  no  such  period  is  men- 
tioned, and  no  such  ecclesiastical  change  even  referred  to  by  any 
ecclesiastical  writer  of  the  primitive  ages  of  Christianity. 

But  if  Infant  Baptism  be  a  divine  institution,  ordained  by  Jesus 
Christ  and  practiced  by  his  Apostles,  it  would  be  rational  to  con- 
clude that  its  introduction  and  practice  would  become  general  in 
the  primitive  Christian  churches,  and  that  it  would  continue  to 
prevail  in  subsequent  ages.  And  this  conclusion  is  verified  by  the 
concurrent  testimony  of  history. 

The  Christian  fathers  represent  Infant  Baptism  as  a  universal 
custom  derived  from  the  Apostles.  Justin  Martyr,  born  about  the 
time  of  St.  John's  death,  says  that  among  the  members  of  the 
Church  in  his  day,  "  there  were  many  of  both  sexes,  some  sixty, 
and  some  seventy  years  old,  who  were  made  disciples  to  Christ  in 
their  infancy y  Origen,  born  eighty- five  years  later,  says:  "There 
was  a  tradition  in  the  Church  received  from  the  Apostles,  that 
children  also  ought  to  be  baptized."  Augustine  says:  "The  whole 
Church  practices  Infant  Baptism;  it  was  not  instituted  by  councils, 
but  was  always  in  use,"  and  that  he  "  never  heard  of  any  person, 
either  in  the  Church  or  among  the  heretics,  who  denied  the  pro- 
priety  of  baptizing  infants."     And   this  testimony,   Pelagius,   who 


268  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

travelled  in  England,  Fiance,  Italy,  Africa  and  Palestine,  cor- 
roborates. Infant  Baptism  can  thus  be  traced  from  the  fifth  century 
down  to  the  first,  yea,  to  the  very  threshold  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 
The  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  history,  relative  to  Infant  Baptism,  is 
summed  up  by  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  as  follows:* 

"During  the  first  four  hundred  years  from  the  formation  of  the 
Christian  Church,  neither  any  society  of  men  nor  any  individual 
denied  the  lawfulness  of  baptizing  infants.  Tertullian  only  urged 
some  delay  in  the  baptism  of  infants,  and  that  not  in  all  cases.  And 
Gregory  deferred  it  perhaps  to  his  own  children.  In  the  next  seven 
hundred  years  there  was  neither  a  society  nor  an  individual  who 
even  pleaded  its  delay.  In  the  year  A.  D.  1120,  one  sect  opposed 
infant  baptism,  but  it  was  opposed  by  the  other  churches  as  hereti- 
cal, and  soon  came  to  nothing.  From  that  time  no  one  opposed 
the  baptism  of  infants  until  the  year  1522,  when  the  Anabaptists 
arose,  since  which  period,  also,  the  great  body  of  the  Christian 
Church  has  continued  to  practice  infant  baptism." 

VIII.  Its  Sacramental  Character,  as  a  Means  of  Grace. 

The  Confessors  declare  that  "  through  Baptism  the  grace  of  God 
is  offered."  By  the  grace  of  God  they  mean  those  moral  and  spirit- 
ual influences  which  God,  out  of  pure  favor,  has  introduced  into  our 
world  through  the  mediation  of  Jesus  Christ,  under  who.se  oper- 
ation man  is  induced  to  exercise  faith  in  the  word  and  promise  of 
God,  through  which  he  obtains  the  remission  of  sins,  becomes  a 
new  creature,  and  is  recognized  as  an  heir  of  eternal  life.  These 
gracious  influences  are  exerted  by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the 
word  of  God.  And  as  we  have  seen  that  water,  as  a  constituent 
element  of  Baptism,  by  its  appropriation  to  a  sacramental  purpose, 
becomes  an  efficacious  sign,  and  as  a  "visible  word,"  united  with 
the  written  and  spoken  word,  with  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  united, 
and  through  which  he  operates.  Baptism  becomes  a  means  of  grace 
co-ordinate  with  the  word  of  God.  As  grace  is  offered  through  the 
promise  of  the  gospel  made  in  Baptism,  when  this  promise  is 
received  by  faith,  the  grace  offered  is  also  conferred  in  Baptism,  and 
becomes  efficacious  in  the  justification,  regeneration,  and  salvation 
of  the  soul.  And  as  children  are  to  be  baptized,  grace  is  offered  to 
them  as  well  as  to  adults  by  Baptism. 

*Pop.  Theol.,  p.  262. 


BAPTISM.  269 

In  accordance  with  these  views  the  Apology  says  :  "  For  it  is 
altogether  certain  that  the  divine  promises  of  grace  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  belong  not  only  to  adults,  but  also  to  children.  Now,  the 
promises  do  not  apply  to  those  that  are  out  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
where  there  is  no  gospel  nor  sacrament.  For  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
exists  only  where  the  word  of  God  and  the  sacraments  are  found. 
It  is,  therefore,  a  truly  Christian  and  necessary  practice  to  baptize 
children  in  order  that  they  may  become  participants  of  the  gospel, 
the  promise  of  salvation  and  grace,  as  Christ  commands.  Matt,  xxviii. 
19.  Now,  as  grace  and  salvation  in  Christ  are  offered  to  all,  so 
Baptism  is  offered  both  to  men  and  women,  to  youths  and  infants. 
Hence,  it  certainly  follows  that  we  may  and  should  baptize  infants; 
for  in  and  with  Baptism,  universal  grace  and  the  treasure  of  the 
gospel  are  offered  to  them." 

Baptism,  as  a  means  of  grace,  is  called  a  sacrament.  This  word 
is  not  found  in  the  Scriptures.  It  was  applied  in  ancient  times  to 
the  oath  of  the  Roman  soldier  {sacrameiitiini)  by  which  he  bound 
himself  to  obedience  and  loyalty.  And  as  by  the  sacraments,  and 
especially  by  Baptism,  the  Christian  is  enrolled  as  a  soldier  of  Christ, 
and  binds  himself  to  be  faithful  to  him,  as  the  captain  of  his  sal- 
vation, it  was  significantly  called  by  the  Latins  a  sacrament,  and  is 
thus  designated  until  this  day  by  the  theologians  of  the  Lutheran 
Church. 

Baptism  is  declared  to  be  one  of  the  "sacraments  through  which, 
as  means,  God  imparts  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  in  his  own  time  and 
place,  works  faith  in  those  that  hear  the  gospel."*  "  Concerning 
their  use  it  is  taught,  that  the  sacraments  have  been  instituted,  not 
only  as  tokens  by  which  Christians  may  be  known  externally,  but 
as  signs  and  evidences  of  the  divine  will  towards  us,  for  the  purpose 
of  exciting  and  strengthening  our  faith;  hence  they  also  require 
faith,  and  they  are  properly  used  then  only,  when  received  in  faith 
and  when  faith  is  strengthened  by  them."t  "True  sacraments, 
*  *       commanded  of  God,  have  the  promise  of  grace,  which  in 

reality  belongs  to  and  is  the  New  Testament.  For  the  external 
signs  were  instituted  to  move  our  hearts,  namely,  both  by  the  word 
and  the  external  signs,  to  believe  when  we  are  baptized,  and  when 
we  receive  the  Lord's  body,  that  God  will  be  truly  merciful  to  us, 

*A.  C,  Art.  V.  t A.  C,  Art.  XIII. 


270  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  Paul  says,  Rom.  x.  17:  "Faith  cometh  by  hearing."  As  the 
word  enters  our  ears,  so  the  external  signs  are  placed  before  our 
eyes,  inwardly  to  excite  and  move  the  heart  to  faith.  The  word 
and  the  external  signs  work  the  same  thing  in  our  hearts;  as  Au- 
gustine well  says:  "The  sacrament  is  a  visible  word;  for  the  ex- 
ternal sign  is  like  a  picture,  and  signifies  the  same  thing  preached 
by  the  word ;  both,  therefore,  effect  the  same  thing."* 

Baptism,  as  a  sacrament,  according  to  the  above  statements,  and 
such  as  are  contained  in  the  parallel  passages  of  the  other  symbols, 
is  an  external  religious  ceremony;  not  only  a  token  of  recognition 
through  which  Christians  may  be  known  to  each  other,  but  an  out- 
ward, efficacious  sign  of  the  divine  will  toward  us,  of  the  grace  01 
the  New  Testament,  of  the  covenant  of  promise,  of  reconciliation 
with  God,  of  human  depravity,  and  of  the  remission  of  sins.  It  is 
a  sure  testimony,  furnishing  evidence  of  God's  grace  and  purpose 
towards  us;  a  confirmation  of  the  word  and  a  seal  of  the  promise 
of  God.  It  is  a  means  through  which  God  imparts  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  operates  in  exciting  and  strengthening  faith,  and  a  washing  of 
regeneration  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  manner  in  which  Baptism,  as  a  means  of  grace,  exerts  its 
influence  and  attains  its  end,  is  also  explained.  As  it  is  an  outward 
ceremony,  a  token  of  recognition  and  a  sign  of  the  most  momen- 
tous truths,  the  meaning  of  the  ceremony,  the  import  of  the  token, 
and  the  signification  of  the  sign,  must  be  apprehended  by  the  recip- 
ient. As  it  constitutes  a  peculiar  form  of  evidence  concerning  the 
divine  will,  a  sure  testimony  of  God's  grace,  a  confirmation  of  his 
word,  and  a  seal  of  his  promise,  the  strong  assurances  of  truth  thus 
exhibited  must  be  received  by  faith.  And  as  living  faith  is  the 
spiritual  grace  which  can  apprehend  the  truth  conveyed  by  a  sym- 
bol, and  rely  upon  the  evidence  attested  by  a  seal,  it  is  properly 
demanded  as  the  necessary  condition  and  qualification  for  the 
reception  of  Baptism  and  its  benefits. 

Baptism  exhibits  and  confirms  truth  in  two  ways,  by  sign  and  by 
statement,  and  addresses  it  to  different  organs.  The  eye  is  the 
organ  through  which  the  truth  signified  is  received,  the  ear  that 
through  which  the  truth  pronounced  is  received,  the  latter  being 
the  same  mode  which  characterizes  the  proclamation  and  reception 

*Apol.,  Art.  VII. 


BAPTISM.  2  7  I 

ot  the  truth  when  preached.  But  the  internal  organ  and  mode  of 
the  reception  of  the  truth,  whether  symboHzed  or  pronounced  in 
the  administration  of  the  sacrament,  or  preached  by  the  ambassador 
of  Christ,  is  the  same,  viz.,  faith  apprehending  and  confiding  in  the 
truth  made  known  by  each,  according  to  its  respective  mode  of 
operation.  This  is  the  Lutheran  view  of  the  sacraments.  The 
generic  conception  which  runs  through  them  is  truth  ;  the  inform- 
ing idea  which  binds  all  their  elements  together  is  that  of  grace  ; 
the  Spirit  which  pervades  and  imparts  to  them  their  inherent  force 
is  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  spiritual  capacity  which  distinguishes 
and  appropriates  to  itself  all  their  contents  is  faith. 

This  view  of  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace,  according  to  which  it 
exerts  its  influence  through  the  supernatural  power  of  the  truth 
signified  and  declared  by  it,  stands  in  contrast  with  several  erroneous 
views  concerning  its  efficacy,  set  forth  and  rejected  by  the  Confes- 
sors. The  first  is  that  of  Thomas  and  the  Dominicans.  They 
maintained  that  God  had  placed  a  spiritual,  supernatural  power  in 
the  water,  and  that  in  consequence  thereof  the  sins  of  the  recipient 
were  washed  away  by  the  water,  in  an  incomprehensible  manner, 
and  without  regard  to  any  other  part  connected  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  Baptism. 

The  second  error  rejected  is  that  of  Scotus  and  the  Franciscans. 
They  maintained  that  Baptism  washes  away  sins,  through  the  as- 
sistance of  the  divine  will,  through  which  such  washing  alone  comes 
to  pass,  and  not  at  all  through  the  word  and  water. 

The  third  error  rejected  is  that  of  the  Romanists.  They  held 
that  Baptism,  as  a  sacrament,  produces  justification  in  its  recipients, 
ex  opcre  operate,  that  is,  by  the  mere  outward  performance  of  the 
work,  without  any  apprehension  of  the  mind,  or  good  disposition  or 
faith  in  the  heart.  The  Scholastics  explain  it  by  the  manner  in 
which  medicine  acts  upon  the  body.  The  force  and  blessed  effects 
of  Baptism  lay  locked  up  in  the  administration  itself,  like  medicine 
in  a  box,  and  upon  the  bare  application  of  which  all  its  legitimate 
effects  follow,  as  when  a  healing  plaster  is  laid  upon  a  wound. 

The  Council  of  Trent  teaches,  that  the  sacraments  produce  their 
effect,  ex  opcre  operate ;  that  the  grace  of  God  was  bound  internally 
and  necessarily  to  them,  so  that  it  is  not  received  through  them  but 
in  them.  Their  efficacy  or  working  is  therefore  always  objectively 
and  necessarily  bound  to  them,  wherever  and  whenever  the  admin- 


272  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

istration  of  them  is  properly  celebrated.  Their  effect  does  not  take 
place  sometimes  and  upon  some  persons,  but  always  and  upon  all 
persons  to  whom  they  are  administered.  Their  efficacy  grows  out 
of  the  matter  and  form  of  the  sacramental  transaction  itself;  it  is 
specifically  its  own,  and  works  necessarily  through  the  mere  ob- 
servance thereof  Their  benefits  depend  upon  the  act  itself,  its 
proper  administration  and  reception,  and  not  upon  the  state  of  the 
mind,  disposition-  or  spirit  of  the  recipient.  Baptism,  as  a  sacra- 
ment, impresses  once,  and  for  all  time,  an  indelible  character  upon 
the  soul.  The  manner  in  which  Baptism  operates  and  produces  the 
justification,  regeneration,  and  salvation  of  its  subjects,  may  be 
characterized  as  objective  and  arbitrary,  physical  and  materialistic, 
magical  and  mechanical,  mysterious  and  incomprehensible,  neces- 
sary and  irresistible.  And  while  it  thus  deposits  its  saving  contents 
into  the  soul  of  its  recipient,  it  becomes  efficacious,  independent  of 
his  having  either  a  spiritual  apprehension  of  its  symbolic  meaning, 
or  true  faith  in  its  word  of  promise.  In  other  words,  it  exerts  its 
saving  power  ex  opcre  operato. 

Its  Effects. 

The  effects  or  benefits  of  Baptism,  in  so  far  as  adults  are  con- 
cerned, are  not  specifically  stated  by  the  Confessors  in  the  Ninth 
Article  of  the  Confession,  but  they  are  described  with  a  considerable 
degree  of  precision  and  comprehensiveness  in  other  portions  of  their 
symbolical  writings.  In  answer  to  the  question  :  "  What  are  the 
gifts  or  benefits  of  Baptism?"  the  Small  Catechism  says:  "  It  work- 
eth  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  delivers  from  death  and  the  devil,  and 
confers  everlasting  salvation  upon  all  who  believe  as  the  word  and 
promise  of  God  declare."  In  the  edition  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion of  1530,  the  Confessors  declared  that  "Original  sin  is  truly  sin, 
which  brings  all  those  under  the  eternal  wrath  of  God,  who  are  not 
born  again  by  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit."  In  the  German  edi- 
tion of  1533,  Melanchthon  modified  the  concluding  phrase  as  fol- 
lows :  "  who  are  not  regenerated  by  Baptism  and  faith  in  Christ, 
through  the  gospel  and  the  Holy  Spirit."  In  the  Apology  he 
quotes  Luther  as  teaching,  "  that  Holy  Baptism  extirpates  and  re- 
moves the  entire  guilt  and  hereditary  debt  (Erbpflicht)  of  original 
sin,  although  the  material  (as  they  call  it)  of  the  sin,  viz.  the  evil 
propensity  and  lust,  remain."     In  the  same  sense  Augustine  is  also 


BAPTISM.  273 

quoted  as  saying:  "Original  sin  is  forgiven  in  Baptism — not  that  it 
becomes  extinct,  but  it  is  not  imputed." 

In  reply  to  the  question :  "  How  can  water  produce  such  great 
effects?"  the  Small  Catechism  says:  "It  is  not  the  water,  indeed, 
that  produces  these  effects,  but  the  word  of  God,  which  accompanies 
and  is  connected  with  the  water,  and  our  faith,  which  relies  on  the 
word  of  God  connected  with  the  water.  For  the  water,  without  the 
word  of  God,  is  simply  water,  and  no  Baptism.  But  when  connected 
with  the  word  of  God,  it  is  a  Baptism,  that  is,  a  gracious  water  of 
life,  and  a  washing  of  regeneration  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  St.  Paul 
says  to  Titus,  iii.  5-8." 

Mclanchthon  quotes  Luther  in  the  Apology  as  maintaining  "that 
the  Holy  Ghost,  given  through  Baptism,  begins  daily  to  mortify  and 
blot  out  the  remaining  evil  desires  in  us,  and  puts  into  the  heart  a 
new  light,  a  new  mind  and  spirit."  And  further :  "  that  original  sin 
as  it  remains  after  Baptism  is,  in  itself,  not  indifferent,  but  that  we 
need  Christ,  the  Mediator,  in  order  that  God  may  not  impute  it  unto 
us,  and  the  constant  light  and  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  mor- 
tify and  remove  it."  And  in  corroboration  of  these  opinions  of 
Luther,  the  Apology  cites  the  following  passage  from  Augustine : 
"  The  law  which  is  in  our  members  is  put  away  by  spiritual  regen- 
eration, and  yet  remains  in  the  flesh,  which  is  mortal.  It  is  put 
away,  for  the  guilt  is  entirely  remitted  through  the  sacrament  (Bap- 
tism) by  which  the  believers  are  born  anew  ;  and  yet  it  remains,  for 
it  produces  evil  desires  against  which  the  believers  strive." 

Baptism,  as  thus  set  forth,  was  regarded  by  the  Confessors  as  a 
means  of  washing  away  original,  and  of  sealing  the  pardon  of  actual 
sin,  as  well  as  a  means  of  imparting  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  whose 
agency  the  soul  is  born  anew  and  sanctified  by  faith  in  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Jesus.  The  explanation  given  of  the  manner  in  which  Bap- 
tism confers  these  benefits  accords  with  the  mode  in  which  the 
sacraments,  as  means  of  grace,  produce  their  saving  effects  as 
already  described. 

The  Scriptural  doctrine  of  regeneration  is  set  forth  in  the  follow- 
ing passages  :  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."  John  iii.  3.  "  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  with 
the  word  of  truth."  James  i.  18.  "  In  Christ  Jesus,  I  have  be- 
gotten you  through  the  gospel."  i  Cor.  iv.  15.  "Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom 


2  74  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

of  God."  John  iii.  5.  "Ye  are  all  the  children  of  God  by  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ."  Gal.  iii.  26.  "  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,  is  born  of  God."  i  John  v.  i.  "But  as  many  as  re- 
ceived him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God,  even 
to  them  that  believe  on  his  name ;  which  were  born  not  of  blood, 
nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God." 
John  i.  12,  13.  These  passages,  with  their  parallels,  declare  the 
absolute  necessity  of  regeneration  to  salvation.  They  teach  that 
the  gospel  as  the  word  of  truth  is  the  instrument,  the  ambassador  of 
Christ,  the  medium  of  communication,  the  Holy  Spirit  the  divine 
agent,  and  faith  the  spiritual  exercise  of  mind  in  connection  with 
which  it  ordinarily  takes  place.  The  doctrine  of  regeneration  thus 
taught,  the  Confessors  set  forth  clearly  and  unequivocally  in  the 
Symbolical  Books.  They  declare  in  the  Apology  that  "  the 
natural  man  is  and  remains  an  enemy  of  God,  until  by  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  through  the  word  preached  and  heard,  he  is 
converted,  endowed  with  faith,  regenerated  and  renewed."  This 
faith  is  not  a  natural  faculty,  capable  of  obtaining  a  "  mere  historic 
knowledge  of  Christ,"  but  a  spiritual  grace,  wrought  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  comprehends  the  word  and  promise  of  Christ,  awakens 
the  "  conviction  "  of  their  truthfulness,  "  receives  "  and  "  firmly 
cleaves  "  to  them,  and  "  trusts  in  Christ,  who  was  given  to  atone  for 
the  sins  of  the  world,  as  the  only  Mediator  and  Redeemer."  And 
where  this  faith  exists,  "  we  are  regenerated  by  it,  and  through  it  we 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost  into  our  hearts,  who  renews  them,  and  thus 
enables  us  to  keep  the  law  of  God,  to  fear  and  love  him."  "  He 
who  thus  believes,  rightly  apprehends  the  great  beneficent  work  of 
Christ,  becomes  a  new  creature  ;  and  prior  to  the  existence  of  such 
faith  in  the  heart,  no  one  can  fulfil  the  law." 

Baptism,  as  a  sacrament,  was  held  by  the  Confessors  to  be  a 
means  through  which,  as  well  as  the  word,  God  imparts  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  in  his  own  time  and  place  works  faith  in  them  that 
apprehend  its  true  significance,  and  believe  the  promise  of  God  con- 
nected with  it.  Baptism  is  consequently  not  a  new  species  of  instru- 
mentality, producing  its  effects  in  an  arbitrary  manner,  but  it  is  a 
means  belonging  to  the  same  species  as  the  word,  through  which 
the  Holy  Spirit  excites,  confirms  and  strengthens  faith,  in  the  same 
manner  as  he  does  through  the  word.  The  analogy  between  the 
manner  in  which  the  word  and  the  sacraments  as  external  signs 


BAPTISM.  275 

produce  their  effects,  explained  by  Melanchthon  in  the  Apology,  is 
also  set  forth  by  Luther.  In  his  Larger  Catechism,  he  teaches  that 
Baptism  signifies  the  "  mortification  of  the  old  Adam,  and  afterwards 
the  rearing  up  of  the  new  man.  For  in  this  Baptism  the  Holy 
Spirit,  grace  and  virtue  are  given  to  suppress  the  old  man,  that  the 
new  man  may  come  forth  and  increase  in  strength."  But  in  order 
that  "  the  gifts  and  benefits "  of  Baptism  may  be  received,  it  is 
necessary  that  the  import  of  "  the  application  of  water  "  should  be 
"  apprehended,"  and  the  pronunciation  of  the  words  of  promise 
comprehended  and  "  believed  "  with  all  the"  heart."  In  this  manner 
the  soul  enters  through  faith  at  Baptism  upon  "  the  new  life,"  and 
through  "  repentance  demonstrates  and  practices  it." 

In  order  that  the  full  significance  of  Baptism  may  be  compre- 
hended, it  must  be  contemplated  as  a  whole.  As  instituted  by 
Christ,  it  is  a  religious  ordinance.  Its  elements  are  water  and  the 
word,  its  administrator  the  minister  of  God,  its  agent  the  Holy 
Spirit.  As  thus  constituted  it  is  revealed  to  man  with  the  condi- 
tions upon  the  fulfilment  of  which  he  may  secure  all  its  benefits. 
These  conditions  are  all  met  by  faith.  It  comprehends  its  meaning 
as  a  "  visible  word,"  it  relies  upon  its  promise  of  pardon,  it  submits 
to  its  administration,  and  it  pledges  obedience  to  its  authoritative 
commands.  In  being  baptized,  the  Christian,  on  his  part,  makes  a 
profession  of  his  faith,  enters  into  covenant  with  God,  confesses  the 
name  of  Christ  before  men,  unites  with  his  Church,  and  consecrates 
himself  to  his  service — and  God,  on  his  part,  places  the  seal  of  his 
covenant  upon  him,  assures  him  of  the  remission  of  his  sins,  and 
grants  him  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  he  may  be  strengthened 
with  might  in  the  inner  man,  "  and  kept  through  faith  by  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation."  As  Baptism  comprehends  the  truth  of 
God,  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  the  faith  of  God,  whatever  may  be  pred- 
icated of  the  word,  as  the  means  of  the  Spirit,  in  working  faith 
and  in  securing  its  justifying,  regenerating,  sanctifying  and  saving 
effects,  may  also  be  predicated  of  Baptism.  Accordingly,  the  Scrip- 
tures declare  that  the  Word  is  "  the  incorruptible  seed  "  of  regener- 
ation, and  Baptism  "the  washing  of  regeneration;"  that  man  must 
be  "  born  again  by  the  word,"  and  "  born  of  water,"  that  is  of  Bap- 
tism;  that  the  Church  is  "sanctified  by  the  word"  and  cleansed  by 
Baptism,  as  a  "  washing  of  water  ;  "  and  that  the  redeemed  are  saved 
by  the  word,  and  saved  by  Baptism,  through  faith  in  the  word  and 
faith  in  Baptism. 


276  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"What  God  hath,  therefore,  joined  together"  in  Baptism,  "let  no 
man  put  asunder  "  by  rational  speculation.  Through  an  analytical 
process,  its  constituent  parts  may  be  separated  and  contemplated  in 
isolation.  The  water  may  be  separated  from  the  word,  the  word 
may  be  separated  from  the  Spirit,  the  administrator  may  be  unin- 
vested with  authority,  and  the  subject  may  be  destitute  of  faith. 
By  divesting  the  water  of  its  significance,  the  word  of  its  supernat- 
ural power,  the  administrator  of  authority,  and  the  recipient  of 
faith.  Baptism  is  destroyed,  and  a  human  ceremony  substituted  in 
its  stead  and  called  by  its  name.  And  when  this  process  of  disin- 
tegration has  been  completed,  the  theological  vandal  can  with  im- 
punity ask:  How  can  a  handful  of  water  applied  to  the  head,  and 
a  (cw  words  addressed  by  the  minister  to  the  ear,  wash  away  sin, 
renew  the  heart,  and  save  the  soul  ?  But  as  the  Scriptures  reveal 
no  such  Baptism  and  contain  no  affirmations  concerning  the  efficacy 
of  such  a  ceremony,  the  question  becomes  absurd  and  needs  no 
answer. 

Nor  must  the  efficacy  of  Bkptism  be  limited  to  time.  It  must,  of 
necessity,  be  administered,  but  its  benefits  are  by  no  means  confined 
to  the  time  of  its  administration.  Baptism  was  the  means  of  im- 
parting the  extraordinary  influences  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  but  they 
were  not  given  in  the  moment  of  its  reception.  The  disciples  of 
John,  whom  Paul  met  at  Ephesus,  were  baptized,  but  received  the 
Holy  Spirit  immediately  afterwards  through  the  laying  on  of 
hands.  While  Peter  was  speaking  at  the  house  of  Cornelius,  the 
Holy  Spirit  fell  on  his  hearers,  and  he  commanded  them  subse- 
quently to  be  baptized.  Christ  received  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  form 
of  a  dove  after  his  baptism  in  Jordan,  and  the  Apostles  were  bap- 
tized with  the  Holy  Ghost  at  Pentecost,  in  the  form  of  cloven 
tongues  of  fire,  without  the  application  of  water.  Baptism  was 
also  the  means  of  imparting  the  ordinary  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Peter  said  to  the  inquirers  at  Pentecost :  "  Repent  and  be 
baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  These  influences  of  the  Spirit  were,  however, 
frequently  imparted  through  the  word  received  by  faith,  and  not 
during  the  time  of  the  administration  of  Baptism.  The  eleven 
Apostles,  of  whose  Baptism  no  record  was  made  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, received  the  ordinary  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  through  faith  in 
the  word  and  call  of  Jesus.     And  the  same  may  be  affirmed  of  the 


BAPTISM.  277 

great  majority  of  the  adult  members  of  the  churches  organized  by 
the  Apostles.  Baptism  is  also  the  means  of  conferring  the  remis- 
sion of  sins.  Peter  preached  a  baptism  "  for  the  remission  of  sins," 
and  Paul  was  commanded  by  Ananias  to  "  arise,  be  baptized  and 
wash  away  his  sins,"  thus  receiving,  as  an  adult,  the  "seal  of  right- 
eousness of  faith  "  in  Baptism,  which,  as  a  child,  he  had  received  in 
circumcision. 

But  its  sealing  power  was  not  limited  to  the  period  of  its  recep- 
tion. That  remained  in  full  force,  and  could  be  appropriated  by 
repentance  through  subsequent  life.  There  is  consequently  nothing 
of  a  temporary  character  connected  with  Baptism.  It  is  not  a  re- 
ligious ceremony  producing  a  magical  effect  during  the  time  of  its 
performance,  but  it  is  a  divine  ordinance,  constituted  with  imperish- 
able elements,  and  clothed  with  perpetual  efficacy.  In  accordance 
with  these  views,  Luther  says  :  "  The  same  words  of  God  once  pro- 
nounced in  the  first  Baptism  endure  forever,  so  that  they  can  after- 
wards rely  on  these  words  if  they  desire;  and  the  water  is  poured 
over  them,  to  enable  them  also  afterwards  to  comprehend  it  in  faith 
if  they  wish."  He  regarded  Baptism  not  as  something  isolated  and 
transient,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  external  administration 
soon  takes  place ;  but  as  a  permanent  and  enduring  transaction,  ex- 
erting its  influence  upon  the  individual  believer  from  the  beginning 
to  the  end  of  his  life,  and  upon  the  Church,  as  the  general  assembly 
of  the  saints,  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 

The  effects  or  benefits  which  Baptism  confers  upon  children,  are 
briefly  stated  by  the  Confessors.  In  the  Latin  edition,  they  say  that 
"  children,  being  offered  to  God  by  Baptism,  are  received  into  God's 
favor."  In  the  German  edition  they  affirm  that  children,  by  "  Bap- 
tism, are  presented  to  God,  and  become  acceptable  to  him."  This 
language  is  generic,  and  no  clear  and  unmistakable  explanation  of 
its  precise  meaning  is  given  in  other  parts  of  the  Symbolical  Books. 
This  resulted  doubtless  from  the  fact,  that  the  inspired  writers  no- 
where explain  the  specific  effects  which  take  place  in  the  mind  and 
heart  of  the  infant  at  its  Baptism,  nor  describe  in  detail  the  bene- 
fits conferred  upon  it  thereby.  These  effects  must  therefore  be 
determined  rather  from  analogy,  implication  and  the  necessity  of 
the  case,  than  from  didactic  statements  contained  in  the  Scriptures. 
On  this  account  the  subject  is  involved  in  more  or  less  obscurity, 
and  beset  with  grave  difficulties.     This  the  Confessors  felt,  and  con- 

19 


278  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

sequently  did  not  attempt  to  make  a  specific  and  full  deliverance  on 
the  subject,  but  satisfied  themselves  with  the  general  statement 
quoted  above. 

The  difificulties  connected  with  the  determination  of  the  effects 
of  Infant  Baptism,  and  the  manner  in  which  they  are  produced,  were 
vehemently  urged  by  the  Anabaptists  and  constantly  felt  by  Luther. 
He  had  rejected  the  opiis  operatmn  theory  of  the  Romanists,  and 
adopted  the  evangelical  theory  of  the  efficacy  of  the  sacraments, 
according  to  which  the  benefits  of  Baptism  can  only  be  received 
through  faith  apprehending  the  truth  signified,  by  the  application  of 
the  element,  confiding  in  the  promise  of  God  repeated  in  its  admin- 
istration, and  obeying  the  command  of  God  enjoined  in  the  words 
of  its  institution.  His  efforts  were  accordingly  directed  to  the  origi- 
nation of  hypotheses  by  the  aid  of  which  he  attempted  to  explain 
the  effects  of  Baptism,  and  the  manner  in  which  they  are  produced 
in  infants,  as  consistent  with  the  manner  in  which  the  same  effects 
are  produced  in  adults,  viz.,  by  faith.  He  at  first  maintained  that 
children  believe  in  a  technical  sense,  but  subsequently  admitted  that 
they  have  not  baptismal  faith  in  the  evangelical  sense,  and  helped 
them  out  by  substituting  the  faith  of  the  Church,  which  presents 
them  for  Baptism.  He  'also  held  that  through  the  power  of  the 
prayers  of  the  believing  Church,  God  infuses  faith  into  the  child, 
and  attributes  the  production  of  the  same  effect  to  the  operation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  through  the  word  of  God  spoken  in  the  baptismal 
act.  These  hypotheses,  however,  neither  silenced  the  Anabaptists 
nor  satisfied  Luther.  He  was  accordingly  led,  in  the  year  1528,  to 
make  a  thorough  re-investigation  of  the  whole  subject  in  the  light 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  the  result  of  which  was  a  modification  of 
his  views  and  the  full  development  of  his  doctrine  of  Infant  Baptism. 

Baptism  is  an  ordinance  of  God.  Its  validity  depends  not  upon 
the  faith  or  worthiness  of  the  recipient,  but  upon  its  divine  institu- 
tion. Its  essence  consists  of  the  element  and  word,  through  which 
its  potver  is  exerted  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  As  thus  constituted,  it 
is  clothed  with  objective  force,  which  faith  may  sooner  or  later  ap- 
propriate. Its  validity  stands  fast  whether  faith  be  present  or  not, 
but  its  beneficial  effects  can  only  be  fully  realized  by  faith.  He  still 
holds  that  children  have  faith,  and  that  the  contrary  cannot  be 
proved,  but  he  hands  the  discussion  of  the  question  over  to  the 
doctors.     In  1523  he  had  said  to  the  Bohemian  Waldensians,  "  It 


BAPTISM.  279 

would  be  better  to  baptize  no  child  any  where,  than  to  baptize  with- 
out faith;"  but  in  1 5 28  in  writing  on  Anabaj^tism  he  said:  "  Faith 
indeed  is  not  for  the  promotion  of  Baptism,  but  Baptism  for  the  pro- 
motion of  faith.  Now,  when  faith  comes,  Baptism  has  what  it  re- 
quires, and  rebaptism  is  useless."  And  he  predicates  the  Baptism 
of  children  not  upon  their  hypothecated  faith,  but  upon  the  com- 
mand of  God,  who  calls  them  to  himself  and  authorizes  them  to  be 
baptized.  Baptism  is  a  prevenient  movement  of  God  towards  the 
child,  through  which  he  makes  a  presentation  of  grace  and  adopts 
it  into  his  family.  Universal  grace  revealed  in  the  gospel  specializes 
and  individualizes  itself  in  Baptism,  so  that  personal  faith,  whenever 
it  may  be  exercised,  does  not  arise  from  the  natural  ability  of  man, 
but  is  called  forth  through  the  prevenient  grace  of  God,  which  is 
objectively  presented  and  rev^ealed  in  the  sacrament.  He  holds  that 
the  effects  of  Baptism  commence  in  the  child  with  its  administra- 
tion, according  to  the  degree  of  lively  susceptibility  possessed  by  it, 
without  determining,  however,  how  far  this  extends.  This  suscep- 
tibility he  calls  faith,  and  regards  it  as  constituting  the  new  birth. 
"The  spiritual  birth,"  says  he  in  his  sermon  on  Baptism,  "takes  its 
rise,  indeed,  in  Baptism,  proceeds  and  increases;  but  only  in  the  last 
day  is  its  significance  fulfilled;  only  in  death  are  we  rightly  lifted 
out  of  Baptism  by  the  angels  into  eternal  life." 

In  the  study  of  nature,  the  truth  of  a  theory  can  only  be  demon- 
strated by  proving  that  all  the  facts  pertaining  to  the  subject  are 
consistent  with  and  can  be  readily  interpreted  by  it.  And  the  same 
method  is  required  to  establish  the  truth  of  a  theory  in  theology. 
The  theory  of  Infant  Baptism  must,  therefore,  be  consistent  with 
and  interpret  all  that  is  declared  in  the  Scriptures  concerning  the 
state,  capacities,  and  relations  of  children.  This  Luther  felt  and 
made  the  attempt  to  accomplish.  Having  adopted  the  theory  that 
the  exercise  of  evangelical  faith  was  indispensable  to  the  reception 
of  the  benefits  of  Baptism  in  an  adult,  he  at  first  maintained  that 
children  became  partakers  of  its  blessings  in  the  same  way,  that  is, 
by  faith.  He  accordingly  adopted  the  hypothesis  that  children 
have  faith.  In  the  Larger  Catechism  he  says:  "  With  respect  to 
Infant  Baptism,  we  bring  forward  the  child  under  the  impression 
and  the  hope  that  it  believes."  If  this  means  that  children  in  their 
natural  state  have  faith,  it  contradicts  the  declaration  made  in  the 
Second  Article  of  the  Confession,  on  Original  Sin,  "  that  all  men  who 


280  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

are  naturally  engendered  are  conceived  and  born  in  sin ;  that  they  are 
all,  from  their  mother's  womb,  full  of  evil  desires  and  propensities, 
and  can  have  by  nature  no  true  fear  of  God,  no  true  faith  in  God." 

Luther  also  adopted  the  hypothesis  that  faith  is  infused  into 
children  through  the  faith  and  prayers  of  the  Church.  "The  young 
children,"  says  he,  "are  through  the  faith  and  prayers  of  the  Church, 
purified  from  unbelief  and  the  devil,  and  gifted  with  faith,  and  ac- 
cordingly baptized."  But  this  method  of  infusing  a  faith  that  puri- 
fies and  renews  the  child,  differs  from  that  in  which  faith  is  said  to 
be  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the  preached  word  in  the 
Fifth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  accords  much  more 
nearly  with  the  spiritualistic  conception  of  the  Anabaptists,  that  the 
Spirit  operates  directly  and  independently  of  the  word.  Luther  also 
adopted  the  hypothesis  that  faith  was  imparted  to  the  child  in  Bap- 
tism, through  the  words  uttered  at  its  administration.  The  sound 
of  the  word  of  God  spoken  strikes  outwardly  upon  the  ear  of  the 
child,  through  which  the  Pioly  Spirit,  who  is  almighty,  and  to  whom 
nothing  is  deaf,  imparts  to  it  faith,  that  is,  a  greater  susceptibility 
for  the  word  of  God.  But  as  the  child  cannot  comprehend  the 
meaning  of  the  sound  of  the  words  spoken,  the  effect  attributed  to 
them  must  be  produced  mechanically,  and  savors  more  of  the  magi- 
cal operation  of  the  Romish  opiis  opcratum  than  the  method  of  the 
Scriptures,  according  to  which  faith  cometh  by  a  hearing,  which 
apprehends  the  meaning  of  the  word  heard. 

Luther  uses  the  word  faith  as  applied  to  children  in  a  technical 
sense.  In  the  Wittenberg  Concordia  he  describes  it  as  follows  :  "  It 
must  not  be  thought  that  the  children  have  understood  (the  word), 
but  there  are  the  movements  and  inclinations  to  believe  the  Lord 
Christ  and  to  love  God,  in  some  measure  similar  to  the  movements 
of  those  who  otherwise  have  faith  and  love;  and  it  is  in  this  way 
that  we  desire  to  be  understood  when  we  say  that  the  children  have 
personal  faith."  He  distinguishes  between  faith  as  a  condition  or 
state  of  natural  susceptibility  for  God,  his  word  and  Spirit,  and  faith 
as  an  act  or  exercise  intelligently  and  consciously  appropriating  the 
grace  offered  through  the  word  and  the  sacrament,  and  explains  it 
as  a  latent  power  of  reception  which  is  set  into  activity  by  Baptism, 
analogous  to  the  faith  of  adults  in  sleep. 

These  various  shades  of  thought  presented  by  the  different  forms 
of  expression  emplo}ed,  indicate  the  impossibility  of  originating  a 


BAPTISM.  251 

satisfactory  explanation  of  the  subject.  Of  a  "latent  power  of  re- 
ception" in  contradistinction  from  the  rational  powers  with  which 
God  has  endowed  every  child,  and  throuf^h  the  possession  of  which 
it  becomes  a  cultivatable  being,  we  can  form  no  distinct  conception. 
And  as  a  change  in  the  susceptibility  is  conditioned,  according  to 
the  rational  constitution  of  man,  upon  a  change  in  the  radical  dispo- 
sition in  which  it  inheres;  and  as  a  change  in  the  radical  disposition 
can  only  take  place  through  an  intelligent  movement  or  disposing 
of  the  mind,  the  awakening  of  a  spiritual  susceptibility  for  God,  his 
word  and  Spirit,  cannot  take  place  without  self-conscious  and  intelli- 
gent action;  and  as  infants  are  incapable  of  such  voluntary  action, 
it  is  impossible  to  understand  how  a  spiritual  susceptibility  in  which 
"inclinations  to  believe  Christ  and  to  love  God"  arise,  can  be  pro- 
duced in  their  hearts  through  Baptism.  All  this  Luther  himself 
felt  and  acknowledged.  While  he  still  held  that  it  was  reasonable 
to  maintain  that  children  do  believe,  he  admits  in  his  letter  on  Ana- 
baptism  that  it  is  "  unknown  to  us  how  they  believe,  or  how  faith  is 
wrought  in  them;"  and  then  adds,  "and  yet,  after  all,  this  is  of  little 
importance." 

The  following  paragraph  taken  from  the  same  letter  presents  the 
scriptural  arguments  by  which  Luther  attempted  to  prove  that  chil- 
dren can  believe.  "  But  we  have  Scripture  to  establish  the  fact 
that  children  may  and  can  believe,  even  if  they  have  neither  lan- 
guage nor  cultivated  reason.  As  the  Scripture  saj's,  the  Jews, 
'  sacrificed  their  sons  and  their  daughters  unto  devils  and  shed  in- 
nocent blood.'  Ps.  cvi.  37,  38.  If  it  were  innocent  blood,  as  the 
text  says,  they  were  certainly  pure  and  holy  children,  and  such 
children  they  could  not  be  without  the  Spirit  and  faith.  Again,  the 
innocent  children,  Matt.  ii.  16,  were  not  over  two  years  old,  and 
undoubtedly  destitute  of  language  or  cultivated  reason  ;  yet  they 
are  now  holy  and  happy.  And  Christ,  Matt.  xix.  14,  sa\'s  in  refer- 
ence to  little  children,  '  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  And 
St.  John  in  his  mother's  womb  was  a  child,  Lk.  i.  41,  and  I  am  of 
opinion  indeed  that  he  could  believe." 

The  argument  is  not  direct,  but  inferential.  It  is  not  expressly 
stated  that  any  of  the  children  referred  to  believed.  As  none  of 
them  were  baptized,  faith  could  not  have  been  infused  into  them 
through  Baptism.  And  if  these  passages  prove  that  children  in 
their  natural  state  are  '"  innocent,"  "  pure  and  holy,"  filled  with  the 


282  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Holy  Spirit,  and  morally  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth  and  in 
heaven,  and  from  which  it  must  be  inferred  that  they  have  faith,  then 
we  cannot  see  how  such  an  interpretation  of  the  above  passages  can 
be  harmonized  with  those  passages  which  declare  that  children  are 
conceived  in  sin,  shapen  in  iniquity,  receive  not  the  things  of  the 
Spirit  of  God,  and  are  by  nature  children  of  wrath.  Nor  can  we 
reconcile  such  an  interpretation  with  the  representations  made  in 
the  Apology,  concerning  the  natural  state  of  man.  "  We  descend- 
ants of  Adam  are  all  so  born  as  not  to  know  God,  that  we  despise 
him  and  do  not  trust  in  him;  yea,  that  we  flee  from  and  hate  him." 
We  are  born  destitute  of  "original  righteousness,"  that  is  with  an 
"innate  want  of  divine  light  and  of  every  thing  good,  which  con- 
tinues so  long  as  we  are  not  born  anew  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
enlightened  by  him." 

The  Confessors  regarded  the  world  as  fallen,  corrupt,  lying  in 
wickedness,  and  doomed  to  destruction ;  and  redemption  as  a  great 
remedial  movement,  designed  to  secure  the  pardon,  moral  recovery 
and  salvation  of  all  men.  As  children  were  involved  in  the  disabil- 
ities entailed  by  the  fall  of  Adam,  they  are  also  included  "  in  the 
promised  redemption  of  Christ."  As  original  sin  exposes  them  to 
condemnation  and  the  development  of  their  depravity,  provision 
must  be  made  for  their  pardon  and  sanctification,  both  of  which  are 
accomplished  through  the  atonement  of  Christ  and  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  As  all  men  are  depraved  and  sinful,  "  Christ  tasted 
death  for  every  man;"  and  the  Spirit  has  been  poured  out  "  upon 
all  flesh."  As  there  was  nothing  good  in  man  to  induce  God  to 
originate  the  movements  of  grace  towards  him,  so  can  there  be 
nothing  in  man  to  limit  their  application,  save  voluntary  unbelief 
and  its  concomitants  and  developments.  As  there  is  no  voluntary 
unbelief  or  actual  antagonism  to  God  found  in  children,  no  moral 
barrier  exists  to  prevent  the  grace  of  God  from  reaching  and  saving 
them.  As  the  Scriptures  reveal  but  "  one  Baptism  for  the  remission 
of  sins  "  and  the  bestowment  of  "  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and 
as  children  are  to  be  baptized  with  that  Baptism,  it  must  be  the 
means  of  washing  away  their  original  sin  and  of  imparting  to  them 
the  Holy  Spirit.  In  consistency  with  these  views,  the  Confessors 
affirm  in  the  Apology,  that  children  are  entitled  "to  the  divine 
promises  of  grace  (pardon)  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  that  "  in  and 
with  Baptism,  universal  grace  and  the  treasures  of  the  gospel  are 


BAPTISM.  283 

offered  to  them  ; "  and  that  they  are  to  be  baptized  "  in  order  that 
they  may  become  participants  of  the  gospel  and  the  promise  of 
grace  and  salvation."  This  explains  what  they  meant  when  they 
said  in  the  Article  under  consideration,  that  through  "  Baptism  the 
grace  of  God  is  offered,"  and  that  children,  by  being  presented  to 
God  in  Baptism,  become  "  acceptable  to  him  and  are  received  into 
his  favor."  In  other  words,  they  held  that  through  Baptism  chil- 
dren were  "  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,"  yea,  "  sealed  with  the 
Holy  Spirit  of  promise,"  who  would,  in  his  own  time,  place  and 
manner,  develop  faith,  as  well  as  work  in  them  "  both  to  will  and  to 
do,  of  his  good  pleasure."  The  truth  of  this  view  may  be  argued 
from  the  following  considerations  : 

I.  From  the  Necessity  of  the  Case.  Children,  as  "  born  of  the 
flesh,"  are  by  nature  children  of  wrath  ;  and  in  order  to  be  saved 
from  perdition  and  qualified  for  heaven,  they  must  become  the  sub- 
jects of  pardoning  mercy  and  regenerating  grace.  As  "  where  sin 
abounded  grace  did  much  more  abound,"  it  follows,  that  to  what- 
ever penal  consequences  and  depraving  influences  they  became  ex- 
posed through  original  sin  entailed  upon  them  by  the  fall  of  Adam, 
adequate  provision  hath  been  made  to  deliver  them  from  its  guilt 
and  dominion  through  the  redemption  of  Christ.  As  nearly  one- 
half  of  the  human  race  die  in  childhood,  provision  must  be  made 
for  their  justification  and  regeneration,  and  it  is  rational  to  conclude 
that  God  would  devise  some  means  adapted  to  its  accomplishment. 
And  as  children  were  incapable  of  being  "born  again,"  like  adults, 
through  faith  in  the  word,  the  Confessors  believed  that  they  were 
capable  of  being  "  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit  through 
holy  Baptism."  And  if,  according  to  the  general  opinion,  God 
effects  the  pardon  and  regeneration  of  all  unbaptized  childrcfn  who 
die  in  infancy,  without  means,  in  an  extraordinary  manner,  it  accords 
much  more  with  his  wisdom  and  goodness  to  conclude  that  he 
will  make  provision  for  accomplishing  the  same  end  through  appro- 
priate means.  And  if  the  approach  of  death  becomes  an  adequate 
reason  for  an  interposition  of  an  extraordinary  movement  of  grace 
towards  them,  their  moral  purification,  usefulness  and  happiness  in 
this  life,  as  the  precursor  of  that  which  is  to  come,  becomes  a  more 
potent  reason  for  a  prevenient  movement  of  grace  towards  them 
through  Infant  Baptism.  And  as  by  being  "  born  of  the  flesh," 
they  will  "  sow   to  the  flesh,"  reap  corruption  and   die ;   by  being 


284  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,"  they  will  sow  to  the  Spirit,  and 
"  from  the  Spirit  reap  everlasting  life." 

2.  From  the  progressive  character  of  the  work  of  fashioning  and 
perfecting  the  new  creature.  Man,  under  the  operation  of  the  work- 
manship of  God,  is  created  anew  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  becomes  a 
new  creature.  The  terms  begetment,  quickening,  birth  and  growth, 
which  set  forth  the  progressive  stages  in  which,  according  to  the 
laws  of  natural  generation,  the  body  of  man  is  conceived  and  grows 
to  maturity,  are  employed  in  a  general  sense  by  the  inspired  writers 
to  exhibit  the  work  of  the  new  creation,  and  in  their  specific  sense, 
they  fitly  describe  the  process  in  which,  "  according  to  the  law  of 
the  Spirit  of  life,"  the  new  creature  is  fashioned,  as  well  as  the  suc- 
cessive stages  through  which  it  must  pass  in  order  to  attain  perfec- 
tion. And  as  Baptism  is  administered  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  involves  the  supernatural 
begetment  of  the  Father,  the  quickening  of  the  Son,  and  the  birth 
through  the  Spirit,  as  well  as  the  subsequent  workmanship  of  the 
Triune  God,  in  fashioning  the  new  creature  into  the  stature  of  a 
perfect  man  in  Christ  Jesus.  As  the  Confessors  adopted  this  com- 
prehensive conception  of  regeneration,  as  the  work  of  the  new  crea- 
tion, they  believed,  according  to  the  analogy  of  Scripture,  that  as 
begetment  involves  all  the  natural  forces,  which  in  their  develop- 
ment fashion  the  old  man  in  Adam,  Baptism  involves  all  the  super- 
natural forces,  which  in  their  development  form  and  perfect  the  new 
man  in  Christ  Jesus. 

3.  From  the  Triie  Conceptio7i  of  Church  Organization.  The  Church 
of  Christ  is  described  in  the  Scriptures,  not  as  a  mechanical  aggre- 
gation, but  as  a  living  organism — as  a  vine,  an  olive  tree,  a  body,  a 
family?  a  kingdom.  As  such  she  is  pervaded  by  a  supernatural  life, 
even  the  life  of  Christ.  In  nature,  atoms  in  their  natural  state  are 
unadapted  to  organization;  but  when  brought  into  connection  with 
a  germ  or  life  force,  they  are  changed  and  assimilated  by  it,  and 
incorporated  into  its  body,  and  by  such  transformation  alone  can 
they  become  constituent  parts  of  a  living  body.  And  to  this  there 
is  a  striking  analogy  in  the  sphere  of  the  supernatural.  It  is  not  by 
mere  accident  that  church  organization  is  represented  as  an  engraft- 
ing of  branches  into  a  vine  or  olive  tree,  and  the  insertion  of  mem- 
bers into  an  organized  body.  Even  when  the  Church  is  represented 
as  a  house,  building  or  temple  composed  of  stones,  the  members  are 


BAPTISM.  285 

declared  to  be  "lively  stones"  with  which  there  is  "built  up  a 
spiritual  house."  Yea,  Paul  says  to  them,  "ye  are  built  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being 
the  chief  corner  stone;  in  whom  all  the  building  fitly  framed 
together  groweth  unto  an  holy  temple  in  the  Lord,  in  whom  ye 
also  are  builded  together  for  an  habitation  of  God,  through  the 
Spirit."  Man  in  his  natural  condition  is  morally  dead,  and  while 
he  remains  in  his  inoi'ganic  state,  he  is  unfit  for  ecclesiastical 
organization.  But  when  brought  into  contact  with  Christ  as  the 
life-force  of  redemption,  he  is  quickened,  changed,  assimilated  and 
incorporated  as  a  living  member  into  the  Church,  as  his  mystical 
body.  Accordingly  Paul  declares  that  Christ  is  the  head  of  the 
bod}',  the  Church;  that  all  Christians  "were  baptized  by  one  Spirit 
into  one  body;"  that  they  thereby  became  "members  of  his  body, 
of  his  flesh  and  of  his  bones;"  and  that  through  such  a  union  with 
Christ,  they  would  be  able  "to  grow  up  in  all  things  into  him,  from 
whom  the  whole  body  fitly  joined  together  and  compacted  by  that 
which  every  joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  effectual  working  in 
the  measure  of  every  part,  maketh  increase  of  the  body  unto  the 
edifying  of  itself  in  love."  This  determines  the  qualifications,  the 
means,  the  process  and  the  results  of  church  organization.  Now, 
if  it  be  the  design  of  Christ  that  children  should  become  members 
of  his  Church,  as  the  Confessors  believed,  it  becomes  indispensable 
that  they  be  transformed  from  a  state  of  moral  death  into  one  of 
spiritual  life.  As  the  Baptism  of  water  was  the  appointed  means 
for  imparting  the  Baptism  of  the  Spirit  to  adults,  and  for  preparing 
them  for  a  living  union  with  Christ,  in  his  Church,  and  as  accord- 
ing to  divine  appointment,  the  same  means  were  to  be  applied  to 
children,  it  follows  that  in  order  to  meet  the  requirements  of  Church 
organization,  and  prepare  them,  as  well  as  adults,  to  become  true 
"members  of  his  body,  of  his  flesh  and  of  his  bones,"  their  Baptism 
must  also  secure  to  them  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

4.  From  the  Indispensable  Conditions  of  Christian  Nurture.  The 
process  and  possibilities  of  Christian  nurture  are  set  forth  analogi- 
cally in  the  Scriptures.  Men  cannot  gather  "  grapes  from  thorns 
nor  figs  from  thistles."  "A  corrupt  tree  cannot  bring  forth  good 
fruit."  "  Whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap."  No 
one  "can  bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  unclean;"  "that  which  is 
born  of  the  flesh  remains  flesh  ;  "  and  "  the  evil  man  out  of  the  evil 


286  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION.     • 

treasure  of  his  heart  bringeth  forth  evil  things."  Now,  as  by  no 
process  of  cultivation  one  species  of  plant  can  be  so  modified  as  to 
become,  and  to  bring  forth  the  fruits  of  another  species,  so  by  no 
process  of  natural  culture  or  education  can  the  depraved  nature  of 
man  be  changed,  and  the  fruits  of  holiness  brought  forth  by  him. 

Christian  nurture  consists  in  so  cultivating  the  plants  of  grace  in 
the  husbandry  of  Christ,  that  they  may  flourish  as  trees  of  right- 
eousness, and  in  so  feeding  the  lambs  of  Christ  that  they  may  be- 
come the  sheep  of  his  fold.  In  other  words,  it  consists  in  so  train- 
ing the  children  of  the  covenant,  that  they  may  grow  up  into  Christ, 
and  be  thoroughly  furnished  unto  every  good  work  as  members  of 
his  Church.  But  without  the  provision  of  supernatural  agency  and 
instrumentality,  capable  of  transforming  tares  into  wheat,  goats  into 
lambs,  and  the  children  born  of  the  flesh  into  children  born  of  the 
Spirit,  spiritual  growth,  as  the  product  of  Christian  nurture,  becomes 
absolutely  impossible.  Such  provision  the  Confessors  maintained 
was  made  through  the  means  of  grace.  Baptism  securing  the  re- 
newing agency  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  word  furnishing  the  instru- 
ment of  Christian  nurture. 

Stier  in  his  "Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  Vol.  VIII,  p.  317,  expresses 
his  views  of  the  relation  of  Infant  Baptism  to  Christian  nurture  as  a 
theologian,  and  his  feelings  as  a  father,  in  the  following  explicit 
terms:  "That  there  should  be  a  Church  which  receives  and  edu- 
cates children  ;  that  there  should  be  a  baptizer,  acknowledging  and 
representing  the  faith  of  the  mother-church,  who  would  invoke  for 
them  the  Triune  God — is  necessary,  but  it  is  also  enough.  Thus 
the  grace  of  him  that  calleth  (that  the  fulfilment  may  not  come  be- 
hind thet3'pe,  Rom.  ix.  ii,)  the  germ  out  of  which  the  tree  of  their 
Christian  life  is  developed  under  spiritual  culture,  is  one  necessary 
foundation  of  Christian  education — of  their  nurture  iti  Christ,  and 
not  merely  into  Christ.  As  a  Christian  father,  I  could  never  regard 
one  of  my  children  as  still  standing  without  the  grace  of  regenera- 
tion, and  not  yet  taken  into  the  covenant  and  promise  through  the 
sacrament  appointed  to  that  end.  The  higher  my  estimation  of  this, 
the  more  deeply  do  I  feel  its  need  for  my  children  as  for  myself; 
and  moreover,  I  have  no  notion  of  any  such  education,  as  should, 
apart  from  the  divine  foundation,  prepare  them  for  and  lead  them  to 
Baptism.  The  more  stress  we  are  in  fact  obliged  to  lay  upon  the 
blessing,  the  sanctification  and  the  union  with  the  Church,  of  a  child 


BAPTISM.  287 

growing  up  in  strict  Christian  culture,  the  more  must  his  subsequent 
Baptism  lose  of  its  importance ;  it  must  in  fact  appear  to  be  a  mere 
supplementary  ceremony  of  water." 

5.  From  the  Declaratio7is  of  Christ  concerning  the  manner  in 
which  little  children  are  made  meet  for  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  in- 
structions given  by  Jesus  Christ — in  regard  to  the  relation  of  chil- 
dren to  his  Kingdom  or  Church,  heretofore  quoted,  establish  the 
logical  connection  of  the  following  propositions,  viz:  that  children 
born  of  the  flesh  will,  until  born  of  the  Spirit,  develop  the  moral 
characteristics  of  the  flesh,  remain  among  the  "lost"  and  "perish;" 
that  it  is  not  the  will  of  God  that  one  such  little  child  should  perish, 
and  that  Christ  came  to  seek  and  to  save  them ;  that  in  order  to 
be  saved  they  must  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  they  must  be 
"born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,"  and  that  to  effect  this  new  birth, 
a  supernatural  instrumentality  must  be  originated  and  applied  to 
them  by  divine  agency;  that  Baptism  has  been  appointed  by  Christ 
as  the  means,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  as  the  agent  for  its  accom- 
plishment; that  Christ  having  commanded  his  Apostles  to  make 
disciples,  by  baptizing  them  in  his  name  and  receiving  them  into 
his  kingdom,  also  enjoined  that  little  children  should  be  received  by 
them  in  his  name;  and  as  there  is  no  other  way  of  doing  this  re- 
vealed in  the  Scriptures,  except  through  Baptism,  they  did  baptize 
the  children  of  believing  parents  and  receive  them  also  into  his 
kingdom;  that  children  thus  received  in  his  name  came  to  Christ, 
received  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  became  members  of  it;  that 
having  entered  the  kingdom  of  heaven  through  Baptism,  they  must 
have  been  *born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit ;"  that  adults  must  first 
be  converted  in  order  to  possess  the  same  gracious  qualifications  for 
receiving  and  entering  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  that  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  as  constituted  by  Christ,  consists  of  baptized  chil- 
dren, and  of  adults  who,  through  conversion,  become  spiritually 
like  them.  The  logical  connection  of  these  propositions  cannot  be 
broken  except  by  a  violation  of  the  rules  of  sound  reasoning,  nor 
can  the  conclusion  which  they  demonstrate  be  resisted,  save  by  the 
adoption  of  Anabaptist  and  Pelagian  sentiments. 

Christ  did  not,  indeed,  baptize  the  little  children  with  water,  but 
received  them  into  his  arms,  laid  his  hands  on  them  and  blessed 
them.  This  could  not  have  been  an  empty  ceremony,  but  was 
much   rather  a  verification  of  the  promise  of  the  Abrahamic  cove- 


288  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

nant.  That  promise  was:  "In  thee  and  thy  seed  shall  all  the 
families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  Christ  was  the  seed  of  Abraham 
(Gal.  iii) ;  he  redeemed  man  in  order  "  that  the  blessing  of  Abraham 
might  come  upon  the  Gentiles,"  and  that  they  "might  receive  the 
promise  of  the  Spirit  through  faith."  "The  blessing  of  Abraham  " 
was,  consequently,  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Son  received  from  the 
Father  "the  promise  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  ii.  33), 
and  ministered  or  dispensed  the  Spirit  (Gal.  iii.  5).  As  Christ  bap- 
tized the  Apostles  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  through  "cloven  tongues, 
like  as  of  fire,"  and  thus  fulfilled  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  made  unto 
them;  as  Peter  expressly  declared  that  "the  promise"  of  the  Spirit, 
which  was  "the  blessing  of  Abraham,"  pertained  also  to  "children" 
(Acts  ii.  39),  as  Christ,  who  ministereth  the  Spirit,  laid  his  hands  on 
them  and  blessed  them,  and  as  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  the 
Apostles  dispensed  the  Spirit,  the  Confessors  believed,  that  Jesus, 
the  seed  of  Abraham,  "  blessed"  the  children  with  "the  blessing  of 
Abraham,"  that  is,  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  thus  fulfilling  the  promise 
of  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham,  and  preparing  them  for  and 
admitting  them  into  his  kingdom. 

6.  From  the  Specific  Office  of  Baptism  as  a  Divine  Ordinance.  While 
Baptism  belongs  to  the  same  species  of  instrumentality  as  the  word 
and  the  Lord's  Supper,  it  is,  nevertheless,  not  identical  with  either 
of  them.  As  a  means  of  grace,  it  is  distinguished  from  the  word. 
Through  the  written  word  remission  of  sins  is  preached  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  offered  to  all  who  repent  and  believe  ;  through  Baptism, 
the  "visible  word,"  the  remission  of  sins  is  sealed  and  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  conferred  upon  the  individual  believer.  The  promise 
of  universal  grace  is  repeated  whenever  the  eye  rests  upon  the 
sacred  page,  or  the  lips  of  the  preacher  open  to  proclaim  it,  and  the 
sound  thereof  reverberates  throughout  all  the  earth,  but  the  promise 
of  personal  grace  offered  by  Baptism  is  never  repeated,  but  concen- 
trated upon  the  individual,  and  stands  good  and  available  to  him 
through  life.  As  a  sacrament.  Baptism  is  also  distinguished  from 
the  Holy  Eucharist.  Like  the  Lord's  Supper,  it  is  a  symbol :  the 
Supper  proclaiming  the  Lord's  death — Baptism  exhibiting  the 
cleansing  poAver  of  his  blood,  the  washing  away  of  sins.  Like  the 
Lord's  Supper,  it  is  a  communion  :  the  Supper  the  communion  of 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ — Baptism  the  communion  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.     Now,  as  the  specific  office  of  the  Lord's  Supper  was  the 


BAPTISM.  289 

comnnmion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  broken  and  shed  for 
tlie  remission  of  sins,  the  specific  office  of  Baptism  is  the  commu- 
nion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  washes  away  all  sin.  If  Paul  could, 
therefore,  truly  say:  "The  bread  which  we  break — is  it  not  the 
communion  of  the  body  of  Christ?  the  cup  of  blessing  which  we 
bless — is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ?"  he  might 
just  as  truly  have  said:  The  water  which  we  pour,  in  the  name  of 
him  who  "ministereth  the  Spirit" — is  it  not  the  communion  of  the 
Holy  Ghost?  As  advocates  of  Infant  Baptism,  the  Confessors  did 
not  believe  that  Baptism,  when  administered  to  children,  lost  its 
essential  constituents  and  became  an  empty  ceremony;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  maintained  that  it  retained  its  specific  office,  and,  conse- 
quently, must  wash  away  their  original  sin,  and  confer  upon  them 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

7.  From  the  Sacramental  Interpretation  of  the  Passages  of  Scripture 
relating  to  Baptism.  "  Go  }'e,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  "Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit, 
he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  "  He  saved  us  by  the 
washing  of  regeneration  and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  "  Christ 
loved  the  Church  and  ga\-e  himself  for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and 
cleanse  it  with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  word."  "  The  Ark, 
wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls  were  saved  by  water,  the  like  figure 
whcreunto,  even  Baptism,  doth  also  now  save  us."  In  these  pas- 
sages a  certain  relation  is  declared  to  exist  between  Baptism  and 
the  birth  and  renewal  of  the  Spirit,  sanctification  and  salvation. 
What  the  precise  nature  of  the  relation  is,  is  not  expressly  stated. 
According  to  the  Romish  view  of  the  sacraments,  the  relation  is 
that  of  cause  and  effect,  and  the  operation  magical ;  according  to 
the  Zwinglian,  the  relation  is  that  of  symbol  and  thing  symbolized, 
and  the  operation  merely  exhibitive;  according  to  the  Lutheran, 
the  relation  is  that  of  a  means  to  an  end,  and  the  operation  sacra- 
mental. These  divergent  views  have  given  rise  to  three  distinct 
methods  of  interpretation,  the  literal,  figurative,  and  sacramental. 
The  Confessors  adopted  the  sacramental  interpretati(Dn,  according 
to  which  Baptism  becomes  the  medium  of  communicating  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  both  children  and  adults,  through  which  and  the  word,  as 
means  of  grace,  he  works  faith,  effects  the  new  birth  and  renewal, 
sanctification  and  salvation.     And  this  interpretation  is  epexegeti- 


290  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

cal  of  the  baptismal  formula,  according  to  which,  to  be  baptized 
INTO  tlie  vavic  of  the  Triune  God,  is  to  be  baptized  into  communion 
with  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  Entertaining  this 
profound  view,  Stier  says:  "Thus  this  Name,  and  in  and  with  it, 
the  uttered,  attested,  revealed  nature  of  God,  is  actually  the  wonder- 
ful virtue  of  the  water  of  Baptism  as  bound  up  in  the  institution  for 
all  futurity,  the  true  water  of  the  word  (Eph.  v.  26)  in  which  the 
Church  is  further  to  be  cleansed  and  sanctified  unto  perfection. 
Beginning,  sum  and  kernel  of  this  word  is  the  name  of  God,  in 
which  life  and  power  are  communicated  by  means  of  the  Spirit. 
*  *  And  because  the  Father  and  Son  work  upon  and  within 
men,  and  enter  them  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  this  third  name  is  here  the 
decisive  and  completing  name.  Therefore  the  first  promise  made  in 
.baptism  at  the  beginning  ran  quite  rightly,  "  Ye  shall  receive  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  But  we  also  know  in  what  way  apostolic 
doctrine  interchangeably  supplements  the  words — "The  baptized 
are  incorporated  into  the  Son  (i  Cor.  xii.  13  ;  Gal.  iii.  27;  Rom.  vi.) 
and  have  put  Him  on,  that  is,  finally,  as  the  children  of  God,  tlie 
Father."  The  words  of  the  Great  Commission,  authorizing  the 
baptism  of  all  nations  into  the  nam.e  of  the  Triune  God,  involve, 
according  to  their  true  import,  being  baptized  into  the  communion 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  well  as  into  the  fellowship  of  the  Father,  and 
of  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ. 

This  is  the  doctrine  of  "  baptismal  grace  "  [tauf  gnade)  held  by  the 
Confessors.  The  grace  offered  and  imparted  through  Baptism  em- 
braces specifically  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  with  him,  generally,  all  the 
promises  of  the  gospel.  Children  through  such  Baptism  are  offered 
to  God,  become  acceptable  to  him,  and  are  received  into  his  favor. 
The  phrase  employed  to  designate  the  effect  of  the  reception  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  through  which  they  become  acceptable  to  God, 
and  qualified  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  is  that  of  the  new  birth. 
Hence  they  call  Baptism  "  a  laver  of  regeneration,"  and  speak  of 
being  "  born  again  by  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit."  While  these 
phrases  are  specifically  applied  to  adults,  who  are  born  again  by 
faith,  and  fully  explained  in  exhibiting  the  doctrine  of  regeneration, 
there  is  no  such  specific  application  and  explanation  made  of  them 
to  children,  and  their  general  reference  to  them  is  explained  by  the 
general  terms  quoted  above.  This  proves  the  caution  of  the  Con- 
fessors as  well  as  their  moderation,  in  setting  forth  the  benefits  of 
Infant  Baptism. 


BAPTISM.  291 

The  individual  sentiments  of  the  Confessors,  on  the  efficacy  and 
benefits  of  Infant  Baptism,  are  more  fully  expressed  in  their  other 
writings.  Melanchthon,  who  worded  the  Ninth  Article  of  the  Con- 
fession and  explained  more  fully  its  meaning  in  the  Apology,  in  dis- 
cussing the  subject  of  Pedo-baptism,  expresses  himself  as  follows; 
"  In  and  by  Baptism  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given  to  children,  who  op'er- 
ates  in  them  according  to  their  measure  {masse')  or  capacity,  as  he 
operated  on  John  in  the  womb  of  Elizabeth.  And  although  there 
is  a  difference  between  the  old  and  the  young,  inasmuch  as  the  old 
are  attentive  to  the  works,  still  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  are,  in 
both  old  and  young,  a  tendency  towards  God."  Luther,  in  explain- 
ing the  effects  of  Baptism,  confines  himself  mainly  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  declarations  of  Scripture  concerning  the  new  creation,  as 
the  special  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  As  man  is  naturally  "  dead  in 
sin,"  Luther  held  that  God  through  the  grace  of  Baptism,  "  consti- 
tutes out  of  the  old,  inanimate  man,  a  saint  with  a  new  principle  of 
life."  As  all  men,  born  of  the  flesh,  must  be  born  of  the  Spirit,  he 
believed  that  "  the  spiritual  birth  took  its  rise  in  Baptism  as  the  wash- 
ing of  regeneration."  As  all  men  must  put  off  the  old  and  put  on 
the  new  man,  he  maintained  that  "  in  Baptism  the  Holy  Spirit, 
grace  and  virtue  are  given  to  suppress  the  old  man,  that  the  new 
may  come  forth  and  increase."  As  all  men  who  are  alive  in  sin 
must  die  unto  sin  and  live  to  God,  he  taught  that  "we  are  buried 
with  Christ  by  Baptism  into  death,  that  like  as  he  rose  from  the 
dead,  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life."  The  work  of  the 
new  creation,  as  above  described,  involves  a  spiritual  quickening, 
spiritual  birth,  spiritual  mortification,  and  spiritual  growth  on  earth, 
culminating  in  spiritual  perfection  in  heaven.  And  as  this  is  espe- 
cially the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  conferred  through  Baptism,  Lu- 
ther held  that  the  Spirit  commenced  the  new  birth  with  its  adminis- 
tration by  imparting  "a  new  principle  of  life"  and  awakening  a 
"  lively  susceptibility  for  God,"  which  he  calls  faith. 

Reinhard  says,  that  the  position  that  faith  is  imparted  to  children 
through  Baptism  is  to  many  Lutheran  theologians  objectionable, 
involves  no  insignificant  difficulties,  and  cannot  be  established  from 
the  Scriptures.  Good  says  that  while  "  the  early  divines  of  the 
Protestant  churches  did  not  generally  adopt  precisely  Luther's 
view,  and  express  themselves  as  if  they  considered  an  infant  capable 
of  the  acts  of  faith,  they  did  speak  of  an  infant  as  capable  of  the 


292  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

seed,  or  principle,  or  incipient  stage  of  faith."  Heim,  the  Wurtem- 
burg  pastor,  writes,  as  quoted  by  Stier,  "The  Reformers  with  all 
their  deep  conviction  of  the  internal  character  of  Christianity,  were 
yet,  in  respect  to^their  understanding  of  the  truth,  too  much  bound 
up  in  externality  of  thought  and  discursive  reasoning.  Hence  it 
came  to  pass  that  the  question  was  agitated  with  so  much  asperity, 
whether  children  could  have  faith,  for  while  this  contradicts  the 
natural  reason  of  man,  it  yet  could  not  be  denied,  according  to  the 
notions  of  the  old  theologians,  without  making  Baptism  a  mere 
empty  formality,  or  a  merely  conditional  assurance  for  the  future. 
The  simple  answer  would  have  been,  that  by  Baptism  itself  the 
germ,  from  which  the  tree  of  faith  would  grow,  was  placed  in  the 
soul  as  the  seed  of  life  from  God."  The  same  view  was  held  by 
Calvinistic  divines.  Calvin  maintains  "  a  seed  of  faith  in  infants  ;  " 
Ursinus  "an  inclinatory  faith."  Voetius  holds  that  "  there;  is  in 
them  a  root,  faculty,  supernatural  principle,  seed  or  nursery,  from 
whence  in  its  own  time  faith  springs  up."  Peter  Martyr  says  that 
faith  in  infants  is  "  incipient  in  its  principle  and  root,  inasmuch  as 
they  have  the  Holy  Spirit,  whence  faith  and  all  virtues  flow  forth." 
While  all  Lutherans  regard  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace,  they  also 
believe  that  when  administered  to  children,  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, it  does  not  lose  its  essential  characteristics  and  become  an 
empty  ceremony,  but  that  it  performs  its  specific  office,  as  the 
medium  of  imparting  to  them  special  blessings.  But  in  the  specific 
enumeration  of  these  blessings,  and  the  explanation  of  the  precise 
effects  produced  by  them  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  children,  they 
express  themselves  in  different  terms. 

Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer  {Evangelical  Reviezu,  Vol.  VIII.,  p.  339.)  says: 
"We  do  not  therefore  insist  on  the  word  Faith,  when  we  desire  to 
designate  tlie  effect  produced  in  the  babe's  soul  by  Baptism  through 
the  operation  of  the  Spirit;  *  *  we  simply  ascertain  from  the 
Scriptures  the  fact  itself,  that  in  Baptism  a  change  influencing  a 
child's  moral  nature  has  been  actually  wrought,  and  this  change, 
which  tends  to  render  the  child  acceptable  to  God,  may  analogically 
be  called  Faith;  or  inasmuch  as  this  change  actually  amounts  to  the 
production  of  a  spiritual  life  in  the  soul,  we  may  call  it  a  spiritual 
birth,  or  adopting  the  Scripture  term  denominate  it  regoieration." 

Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  (Conservative  Reformation,  p.  579,)  explains  it 
as  follows :  "  Faith  as  an  act,  like  sin  as  an  act,  presupposes  a  condi- 


BAPTISM.  293 

tioii  of  mind,  which  condition  is  the  principal  thing  in  both  cases,  to 
which  the  act  is  merely  phenomenal.  *  *  By  nature  the  infant 
is  as  really  a  sinner,  and  by  grace  as  really  a  believer,  as  the  adult 
is,  though  it  can  neither  do  sin  nor  exercise  faith.  It  has  sin  by 
nature  and  it  lias  faith  by  grace.  Working  out  under  the  law  of 
the  first  condition,  it  will  inevitably  do  sin,  as  under  the  law  of  the 
second,  it  will  exercise  faith.  Faith  justifies  by  its  receptivity  alone. 
There  is  no  justifying  merit  in  faith  as  an  act,  nor  is  there  any  in 
the  acts  it  originates.  In  the  adult  it  is  divinely  wrought,  it  '  is  not 
of  ourselves,  it  is  the  crjft  of  God.'  In  the  infant  there  is  wrought 
by  God,  through  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  means  of  the  water  and  the 
word,  that  receptivity  of  condition,  which  it  has  not  by  nature.  The 
Holy  Ghost  offers  grace,  and  so  changes  the  moral  nature  of  the 
child,  that  this  nature  becomes  receptive  of  the  grace  offered.  This 
divinely  wrought  condition  we  call  receptive  faith,  and  though  its 
phenomena  are  suspended,  it  is  really  faith,  and  involves  what  is 
essential  to  justification,  as  does  the  faith  of  the  adult." 

Dr.  B.  Kurtz  (Infant  Baptism,  p.  156,  157),  bears  the  following 
testimony:  "We  have  already  remarked  that  we  do  not  feel  war- 
ranted to  define  the  nature  and  measure  of  this  blessing  (viz.  that  of 
Baptism).  It  may  be,  for  aught  we  know,  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  in  those  secret  spiritual  influences,  by  which  the  actual  re- 
generation of  those  children  who  die  in  infancy  is  effected,  and 
which  is  a  seed  of  life  in  those  who  are  spared,  to  prepare  them  for 
instruction  in  the  word  of  God,  as  they  are  taught  it  by  parental 
care,  to  incline  their  will  and  affections  to  good,  and  to  begin  and 
maintain  in  them  the  war  against  inward  and  outward  evil,  so  that 
they  may  be  divinely  assisted,  as  reason  strengthens,  to  make  their 
calling  and  election  sure."     *      * 

*  *  "Baptism  is,  in  an  eminent  degree,  the  emblem  of  moral 
purification  by  the  new  birth,  and  may  even  become  the  blessed 
means  of  that  birth.  But  the  uniform  agent  in  effecting  that  birth, 
is  the  Holy  Spirit.  These  remarks  appear  to  favor  the  notion,  that 
the  influences  of  the  Spirit  may  possibly  constitute  the  blessing  con- 
veyed to  children  at  their  Baptism.  That  those  influences  become 
immediately  active  is  not  maintained  by  us,  because  the  infant  is 
not  as  yet  a  moral  agent,  or  capable  of  intelligent  or  responsible 
action;  but  so  soon  as  he  arrives  at  the  age  of  discretion,  he  may 
seriously  meditate  on  his  relations  as  a  member  of  the  Church,  and 
20 


294  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  blessing  imparted  at  his  Baptism  may  become  effectual  to  his 
conversion  and  salvation,  or  if  he  die  before  he  reaches  that  age, 
the  same  blessing  may  become  alike  efficient,  in  renewing  his  nature 
and  qualifying  him  for  heaven." 

Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  in  his  Popular  Theology,  p.  273,  274,. 
teaches  that  the  Scriptures  represent  Baptism  to  adult  believers  "  as 
a  means  for  obtaining  the  remission  of  sins,"  and  also  "  as  a  means 
of  regeneration."  It  is  termed  the  washing  of  regeneration,  and  yet 
it  is  admitted  that  regeneration  is  effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
through  the  means.  The  agency  of  the  Spirit  is  distinctly  asso- 
ciated by  the  Saviour  himself  with  Baptism,  one  of  whose  special 
advantages  consists  "  in  the  immediate  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit."  "  Baptism  in  infants  (Definite  Synodical  Platform,  p.  31)  is 
the  pledge  of  the  bestowment  of  those  blessings  purchased  by 
Christ  for  all."  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive."  And  "  the  promise  is  to  you  and  your  children," 
Acts  ii.  39.  Those  blessings  are  forgiveness  of  sins,  or  exemption 
from  the  penal  consequences  of  natural  depravity,  (which  would  at 
least  be  exclusion  from  heaven,  on  account  of  moral  disqualification 
for  admission,)  reception  into  the  visible  Church  of  Christ,  grace  to 
help  in  every  time  of  need,  and  special  provision  for  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord,  to  which  parents  pledge  themselves." 

He  had  taught  (Pop.  Theol.,  p.  148)  that  as  "  the  atonement  not 
only  delivered  its  subjects  from  punishment,  but  purchased  for  them 
a  title  for  heaven,  it  follows  that  children  (who  are  embraced  in  it) 
not  having  lost  their  title  by  voluntary  unbelief,  will  for  Christ's 
sake  enjoy  the  benefit  of  it,  that  is,  that  at  death  their  corruptible 
nature  shall  be  transformed  into  an  incorruptible,  and  their  mortal 
into  an  immortal  one,  and  they,  liberated  from  their  moral  disease,  be 
ushered  into  the  blissful  presence  of  Him  who  said:  'Suffer  little 
children  to  come  unto  me,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.' " 

Now,  as  God  would  thus  remove  the  guilt  and  corruption  of 
original  sin  from  unbaptized  children  dying  in  infancy,  in  an  extra- 
ordinary manner  without  means,  and  as  the  specific  office  of  Bap- 
tism is  to  seal  the  remission  of  sins  and  confer  the  Holy  Spirit  upon 
adults,  consistency  demands  that  it  must,  unless  it  ceases  to  be 
Baptism  and  becomes  something  else,  perform  the  same  office  when 
administered  to  children.  He  accordingly  admits  that  through 
Baptism  God  "bestows  upon  children  forgiveness  of  sins"  and  "re- 


BAPTISM.  295 

moves  their  moral  disqualification  for  admission  into  heaven," 
which  can  be  nothing  else  but  the  application  of  the  redemption 
remedy  for  their  "  moral  disease"  (natural  depravity)  through  the 
influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  If  this  be  not  his  meaning,  then  his 
statement  involves  two  insuperable  difficulties.  The  first  is  that 
Baptism,  when  administered  to  children,  must  be  split  into  two,  the 
one-half,  which  seals  the  remission  of  original  sin,  being  present,  but 
the  other  half,  which  confers  the  Holy  Spirit,  being  absent,  and,  01 
course,  inoperative.  The  second  difficulty  is  that  if  Baptism  only 
removes  the  penal  consequences  of  original  sin,  and  fails  to  provide 
grace  to  overcome  the  dominion  of  its  sinful  influence,  through  the 
Holy  Spirit,  it  would  provide  only  for  one  of  the  evils  entailed  by 
original  sin,  and  leave  the  other,  no  less  important,  unprovided  for, 
and  present  the  baptized  child  in  an  anomalous  condition  in  the 
moral  universe,  justified  and  saved  from  hell,  but  unregenerate  and 
unfit  for  heaven.  And  the  declaration  that  Baptism  furnishes  the 
child  with  "  grace  to  help  in  every  time  of  need,"  must  prove  de- 
lusive unless  it  confers  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  whose  influence 
alone  it  can  be  born  of  God,  and  trained  as  his  child,  through 
Christian  nurture  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  But  that  Dr.  Schmucker 
did  mean  what  we  have  said,  is  clear  from  the  declaration  made  by 
him  in  his  Lutheran  Manual,  p.  141,  "  As  to  the  benefits  of  Baptism 
to  children,  it  may  be  said  that,  in  addition  to  being  admitted  by  it 
into  the  visible  Church  of  Christ,  and  securing  the  advantages  of  a 
religious  Christian  education,  this  ordinance  confers  on  them  all  the 
other  benefits  that  it  does  on  adults  (including,  of  course,  remission 
of  sins  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost)  so  far  as  they  are  capable  of 
receiving  them." 

As  the  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  regeneration,  are  mys- 
terious and  incomprehensible,  the  effects  produced  by  him,  through 
Baptism,  on  the  soul  of  an  infant,  can  not  be  described.  The  repre- 
sentations quoted  above,  that,  in  baptism,  there  is  a  new  principle, 
faculty  or  life  implanted,  or  a  supernatural  germ,  seed  or  root  depos- 
ited in  the  soul  of  the  child,  must,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  human 
efforts  to  explain  what  the  inspired  writers  and  the  Confessors  left 
unexplained.  The  hypotheses  that  children  have  faith,  and  that  it 
is  infused  into  them  by  baptism,  and  the  explanations  given  by  the 
theologians  just  named,  of  this  peculiar  species  of  faith,  savor  more 
of  the  Romish  than  of  the  Lutheran  view  of  the  sacraments.     And 


296  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  fact  that  the  advocates  of  these  doubtful  speculations  appeal  to 
Matt,  xviii.  5,  6,  and  Tit.  iii.  5  in  support  of  them,  proves  to  what 
straits  they  are  reduced  to  find  any  scripture  warrant  for  their  opin- 
ions. The  appropriation  of  these  passages  to  such  a  use  is  incon- 
sistent with  their  context,  contradicted  by  the  analogy  of  faith,  and 
rejected  by  many  of  the  .most  distinguished  expositors  and  theolo- 
gians.* 

The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  "  Baptismal  grace,"  is  also  taught  in 
the  catechism  and  liturgies  adopted  by  the  General  Synod.  In 
the  "  Order  of  Salvation,"  the  following  questions  and  answers 
occur.  88.  "  How  does  the  Holy  Ghost  enlighten  and  sanctify 
us?"  "  The  Holy  Ghost  works  in  us  faith  in  Christ,  and  makes  us 
entirely  new  creatures."  92.  "  When  did  the  Holy  Ghost  begin 
this  sanctification  in  you?"  "In  the  holy  ordinance  of  Baptism 
the  Holy  Ghost  began  this  sanctification  in  me,"  Titus  iii:  5,  7. 
93.  "  What  did  God  promise  you  in  holy  Baptism?"  "God  pro- 
mised and  also  bestowed  upon  me,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  life  and 
salvation,"  Acts  ii.  38;  i  Pet.  iii.  21.  94.  "  But  what  did  you  pro- 
mise God  ?"  "I  promised  that  I  would  renounce  tlie  devil  and  all 
his  works,  and  all  his  ways,  and  believe  in  God,  the  Father,  Son  and 
Holy  Ghost,"  Rom.  vi.  2,  3;  James  iv.  7  ;  Hosea  ii.  19,  20;  Rev.  ii. 
10.  95.  "  Through  whom  did  you  make  this  promise  in  holy  Bap- 
tism? "  "  I  made  this  promise  in  holy  Baptism  through  my  parents, 
or  sponsors."  96.  "  Are  all  baptized  persons  holy  and  pious?" 
"  No,  many  fall  from  their  baptismal  covenant,"  2  Pet.  ii.  20,  22. 
97.  "  Whereby  does  a  person  fall  from  his  baptismal  covenant?" 
"  By  wilful  sin  we  fall  from  our  baptismal  covenant,"  Is.  lix.  2.  99. 
"  How  can  such  a  wilful  sinner  be  sanctified  again  ?  "  "  He  can  be 
sanctified  again  through  the  word  of  God,"  John  xvii.  7;  James  i.  21. 
100.  "  But  to  what  does  the  word  of  God  exhort  us?"  "  The  word 
of  God  exhorts  us  to  repentance  and  conversion,"  Matt.  iii.  2  ;  Acts  ii. 
38.  Under  the  conviction  that  grace  is  offered  in  Baptism  through 
the  Holy  Spirit,  the  following  petitions  are  found  in  the  baptismal 
formulas  for  infants  in  both  the  first  and  second  liturgies  of  the 
General  Synod.  "And  now,  when  he  (she)  has  been  baptized  ac- 
cording to  the  institution  of  our  blessed  Redeemer,  we  pray  that  he 
(she)   may  also  be   regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  that  he  (she) 

*  Consult  Olshausen,  Meyer,  Stier,  Neander,  Baumgarten,  Bengel,  Paulus 
Chrysostom,  Calvin,  Beza,  Erasmus  and  Grotius. 


BAPTISM.  297 

may  die  unto  sin,  live  unto  righteousness,  be  incorporated  into  thy 
holy  Church,  and  rendered  a  partaker  of  eternal  life."  "  We  bring 
this  child  to  thee  to  be  baptized.  Take  him  as  thine  own,  and 
bestow  upon  him  all  the  blessings  that  flow  from  the  '  washing  of 
regeneration.'  Bring  him  to  a  saving  knowledge  of  thy  truth,  that 
his  soul  may  be  truly  converted  to  thee.  Sanctify  him  by  thy 
Spirit,  that  he  may  be  delivered  forever  from  the  power  of  sin  and 
Satan,  and  that  by  receiving  the  spirit  of  adoption,  he  may  inherit 
eternal  life,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." 

But  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  was  neither  originated,  nor 
first  discovered,  by  Luther  and  the  Reformers.  It  was  found  in  the 
Scriptures  by  the  primitive  Church,  and  practically  illustrated  in  her 
organization  and  development.  It  was  involved  in  the  oecumenical 
creeds  and  taught  by  the  fathers.  Origen  states  it  as  follows : 
"  According  to  the  usage  of  the  Church,  Baptism  is  given  even  to 
infants,  when,  if  there  were  nothing  in  infants  which  needed  forgive- 
ness and  mercy,  the  grace  of  Baptism  would  seem  to  be  superfluous. 
Infants  are  baptized  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  No  one  is  free  from 
pollution,  though  he  has  lived  but  one  day  upon  earth.  And  be- 
cause by  Baptism  native  pollution  is  taken  away,  therefore  infants 
are  baptized."  It  was  also  defended  by  Augustine,  the  champion 
of  orthodoxy,  and  even  inconsistently  admitted  by  Pelagius. 

Augustine  asks  :  "  Why  are  infants  baptized  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  if  they  have  no  sin  ?"  Pelagius  replies  :  "  Who  can  be  so  im- 
pious as  to  hinder  infants  from  being  baptized,  and  born  again  in 
Christ,  and  so  make  them  miss  of  the  kingdom  of  God."  Augustine 
further  says:  "  In  baptized  infants  the  Holy  Spirit  dvvelleth,  though 
they  know  it  not.  So  know  they  not  their  own  mind — they  know 
not  their  own  reason,  which  lies  dormant,  as  a  feeble  glimmer, 
which  is  to  be  aroused  with  the  advance  of  years." 

The  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  is  not,  however,  confined  to  the 
Lutheran  Church,  but  is  also  held  by  other  Protestant  denominations. 
The  Moravians  accepted  it,  by  the  adoption  of  the  Augusburg  Con- 
fession. The  Church  of  England  appropriated  it,  in  compiling  her 
Thrrty-Nine  Articles  and  her  liturgical  formulas  from  Lutheran 
sources.  The  Calvinistic  Churches  have  differed  from  the  Lutheran 
in  their  statements  concerning  the  grace  of  Baptism,  as  well  as  the 
extent  of  its  availability,  limiting  its  blessings  to  elect  infants.  But 
so  repugnant   do   their   representations  appear   in   the  light  of  the 


298  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Scriptures  and  the  universally  received  faith  of  the  Church  prior  to 
the  rise  of  Calvinism,  that  many  of  their  ablest  divines  have  modified 
their  opinions  and  embraced  in  substance,  if  not  in  form,  the  Luth- 
eran doctrine.  They  have  maintained  that  justification  and  regen- 
eration are  not  only  signified  and  sealed,  but  also  imparted  in  Bap- 
tism, either  to  all  infants,  or  at  least  to  the  elect.  Calvin  says  to 
Melanchthon  :  "  I  grant  that  the  efficacy  of  the  Spirit  is  present  in 
Baptism,  so  that  we  are  washed  and  regenerated.  We  deny  that 
infants  cannot  be  regenerated  by  the  power  of  God,  which  is  as  easy 
to  him  as  it  is  wonderful  and  mysterious.  But  as  they  (the  objectors) 
think  it  would  be  such  a  great  absurdity  for  any  knowledge  of  God 
to  be  given  to  infants,  to  whom  Moses  denies  the  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  I  would  beg  them  to  inform  me,  what  danger  can  result 
from  our  affirming  that  they  already  receive  some  portion  of  that 
grace,  of  which  they  will  ere  long  enjoy  the  full  abundance."  Ac- 
cordingly the  late  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Kurtz, 
observed  :  "  A  gracious  God  may  even  then  (at  the  moment  when 
the  ordinance  is  administered)  accompany  the  outward  emblem  with 
the  blessing  which  it  represents,  even  the  washing  of  regeneration 
and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  late  Dr.  A.  A.  Alexander, 
Professor  in  the  Presbyterian  Seminary  at  Princeton,  expresses  his 
views  on  the  subject  of  baptismal  grace  in  the  following  explicit 
terms,  and  maintains  that  his  sentiments  are  in  perfect  accordance 
with  the  doctrines  received  as  othodox  by  the  Presbyterian  Church: 
"  I  do  maintain  that  tJie  germ  of  spiritual  life  may  be  communicated 
to  the  soul  of  an  infant,  which,  of  course,  remains  inactive  as  does  the 
principle  ofsin,  until,  etc. — this  development  is  altogether  by  the  word, 
etc.  But  the  doctrine  that  infants  are  incapable  of  being  regenerated, 
until  they  are  capable  of  attending  to  the  word  is  in  my  opinion 
fraught  with  consequences,  subversive  of  our  whole  system.  For,  if 
infants  are  incapable  of  a  holy  principle,  the  same  must  be  true  of  a 
sinful  principle,  and  then  the  whole  doctrine  of  birth-sin  or  natural 
depravity  is  set  aside.  It  may  remove  some  obscurity  from  the 
subject  to  say,  that  we  are  accustomed  in  treating  the  subject  of 
regeneration  with  accuracy,  to  distinguish  between  it  and  cTon- 
VERSION.  The  cvie  is  the  communication  of  spiritual  life,  the  other  is 
its  exercise.  Suppose  a  dead  seed  to  be  impregnated  with  a  vital 
principle,  and  you  have  my  idea  of  regeneration."  Life  of  A.  A. 
Alexander,  p.  587. 


BAPTISM.  299 

"  And  what  time  in  infancy  is  more  likely  to  be  the  period  of 
spiritual  quickening,  than  the  moment  when  that  sacred  rite  is  per- 
formed, which  is  strikingly  emblematic  of  this  change.  Whether  it 
be  proper  to  say  that  Baptism  may  be  the  means  of  regeneration, 
depends  upon  the  sense  in  which  the  word  jncafis  is  used.  If  in  the 
sense  of  presenting  motives  to  the  rational  mind,  as  when  the  word 
is  read  or  heard,  then  it  is  not  a  means,  for  the  child  has  no  knowl- 
edge of  what  is  done  for  it.  But  if  by  means  be  meant  something 
that  is  accompanied  by  the  divine  efficiency,  changing  the  moral 
nature  of  the  infant,  then,  in  this  sense,  Baptism  may  be  called  the 
means  of  regeneration;  when  thus  accompanied  by  divine  grace." 
Religious  Experience,  p.  38. 

In  comparison  with  the  specific  and  emphatic  declaractions  made 
by  the  distinguished  Reformed  and  Lutheran  theologians  quoted 
above,  in  regard  to  Infant  Baptism  and  its  gracious  efficacy,  how 
moderate  do  not  the  representations  of  our  Lutheran  Confessors 
appear.  They  affirm,  "  That  through  Baptism  the  grace  of  God  is 
ofiered,  that  children  are  to  be  baptized,  and  being  through  Bap- 
tism offered  to  God,  become  acceptable  unto  him,  and  are  received 
into  his  favor."  And  further,  "That  children  are  to  be  baptized,  in 
order  that  they  may  become  participants  of  the  gospel,  that  is  of  the 
promises  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  grace  and  salvation,  which  belong  not 
only  to  adults,  but  also  unto  children ;  for  in  and  with  Baptism  uni- 
versal grace  and  the  treasures  of  the  gospel  are  offered  to  them." 

The  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace,  thus  set  forth  by  the  Confessors, 
is  sustained  by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  interpreted  by  the  most 
learned  and  profound  commentators  of  ancient  and  modern  times; 
it  was  confessed  by  the  primitiv-e  Church  and  defended  by  the 
Christian  fathers;  it  was  corrupted  and  abused  by  the  Romanists, 
but  it  has  been  accepted  by  the  great  majority  of  the  Protestants. 
It  supplies  the  spiritual  wants  of  the  children  in  the  family,  and  im- 
poses the  obligation  of  Christian  nurture  upon  parents;  it  builds  up 
the  Church,  by  affording  adequate  incentives  to  the  religious  train- 
ing of  the  young;  it  promotes  the  stability  of  the  State,  and  advances 
the  moral  progress  of  the  nations.  Perverted  and  misapplied  by 
some,  misapprehended  and  assailed  by  others,  it  has,  nevertheless, 
maintained  the  ascendancy  in  the  Lutheran  household  of  faith. 
And  as  it  could  not  be  overthrown,  neither  will  it  be  abandoned, 
.but  rather  maintained  in  its  scriptural  and  confessional  integrity. 


300  AUGSBURG    COISFESSION. 

Its  Necessity. 

In  the  Latin  text  of  the  Confession,  the  Confessors  declare  that 
"  Baptism  is  necessary  to  salvation."  But  as  this  phraseology  was 
liable  to  be  misunderstood,  they  omitted  the  words  "to  salvation" 
in  the  German  edition,  and  simply  affirmed  that  "  Baptism  is  neces- 
sary." And  to  guard  still  more  against  the  misinterpretation  of 
the  language  employed,  Melanchthon  added  to  the  Latin  form  of 
the  declaration  concerning  the  necessity  of  Baptism  to  salvation,  in 
subsequent  editions,  the  explanatory  phrase,  "as  a  ceremony  insti- 
tuted by  Christ." 

They  predicated  its  necessity  upon  the  declaration  and  command 
of  Christ,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God,"  John  iii.  5.  "Go  ye,  there- 
fore, and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  And  as 
Christ  instituted  Baptism  as  a  ceremony  through  which  all  his 
followers  should  be  initiated  into  his  Church,  and  enjoined  its 
observance  upon  them,  it  becomes  necessary  to  be  baptized,  in  order 
that  obedience  may  be  rendered  to  his  command,  and  all  the  bless- 
ings of  the  kingdom  of  God  secured. 

But  Baptism  was  not  regarded  by  the  Confessors  as  necessary 
per se,  but  as  a  means  through  which  God  offers  his  grace;  not  nec- 
essary unconditionally,  but  conditioned  upon  the  possibility  of 
receiving  it;  not  necessary  absolutely,  but  ordinarily  as  a  moral 
obligation,  imposed  by  the  word  and  institution  of  Christ.  Accord- 
ingly, a  distinction  must  be  made  between  that  which  is  essential 
and  that  which  is  merely  necessary.  Being  "born  of  the  Spirit"  is 
absolutely  essential  to  an  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of  God;  being 
"born  of  water"  relatively  necessary.  The  internal  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  unconditionally  essential  to  salvation  ;  the  outward 
"  washing  of  regeneration  "  ordinarily  necessary. 

In  consistency  with  these  discriminating  statements,  the  Lutheran 
Church  has  not  held  that  Baptism  was  absolutely  necessary  to  sal- 
vation. Accordingly  Luther  says,  that  not  the  deprivation  of 
Baptism,  but  the  contempt  of  it,  condemns  a  man — and  that  although 
God  binds  us  to  the  means  as  the  ordinary  instruments  of  his  grace, 
he  is  not  himself  limited  by  them.  The  dying  thief,  though  unbap- 
tized,  ascended  to  Paradise;  while  Simon  Magus,  notwithstanding 
his  Baptism,  remained  "  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  in  the  bonds  of 


BAPTISM.  301 

iniquity."  And  in  like  manner,  "  as  children  also  belong  to  the 
promised  redemption  effected  by  Christ,"  and  ought  on  that  account 
to  be  baptized,  nevertheless,  should  their  Baptism  be  neglected  prior 
to  death,  they  would  not,  on  that  account,  be  excluded  from  heaven. 
In  other  words,  children  dying  in  infancy  out  of  the  Church,  even 
those  of  the  heathen,  are  saved  without  baptism,  through  the  saving 
efficacy  of  the  redeeming  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  extraor- 
dinary operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Baumgarten  says :  "  The  necessity  of  Baptism  is  not  an  absolute, 
unconditional  necessity,  but  a  moral  obligation,  which  presupposes 
and  requires  an  outward  opportunity. ' 

Cotta,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Krauth,  maintains  the  salvation  of  infants 
by  the  following  considerations:  "  i.  From  the  infinite  pity  of  God, 
2.  The  extent  of  the  benefits  wrought  by  Christ.  3.  The  analogy 
of  faith — no  one  absolutely  reprobated,  but  actual  unbelief  alone 
condemns.  4.  Not  the  absence  but  the  contempt  of  Baptism  con- 
demns. 5.  God  can  operate  in  an  extraordinary  way.  6.  Though 
original  sin,  in  itself,  merits  damnation,  and  is  a  sufficient  cause  of  it, 
yet  it  is  not,  (because  of  God's  infinite  goodness,)  an  adequate  cause 
of  the  actual  infliction  of  the  condemnation." 

Luther,  while  he  held  that  Baptism  was  necessary  to  salvation  in 
general,  says  in  reference  to  the  children  of  Christians  who  have 
died  unbaptized :  "  The  holy  and  merciful  God  will  think  kindly 
upon  them.  What  he  will  do  with  them,  he  has  revealed  to  no  one, 
that  Baptism  may  not  be  despised,  but  has  reserved  to  his  own 
mercy :  God  does  wrong  to  no  one."  And  as  regards  children  in 
general,  he  says  :  "  God  has  not  bound  himself  to  the  sacraments, 
so  as  not  to  do  otherwise,  without  the  sacraments.  So  I  hope  that 
the  good  and  gracious  God  has  something  good  in  view  for  those 
who,  not  by  any  guilt  of  their  own,  are  unbaptized." 

Its  Adaptation. 

Wisdom  is  exhibited  in  the  adaptation  of  means  to  the  attainment 
of  ends.  The  provisions  of  redemption  show  the  manifold  wisdom 
of  God.  Baptism  as  a  divine  ordinance  must,  therefore,  be  charac- 
terized by  adaptation. 

I.  Baptism  is  Adapted  to  the  Presentation  of  Children  to  God. 
Children  are  said  to  be  a  heritage  from  the  Lord,  who  is  the  framer 
of  their  bodies  and  the  Father  of  their  spirits.     Hence  he   says: 


302  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"  All  souls  are  mine  ;  "  Ezek.  xviii.  4.  The  gift  of  a  child  is  there 
fore  the  greatest  earthly  blessing  which  God  can  confer  upon 
parents,  and  it  is  befitting  that  they  should  recognize  his  claims,  and 
dedicate  it  to  his  service.  Accordingly,  God  required  parents  to 
offer  every  male  child  to  him  through  circumcision,  and  to  present 
to  him  besides  all  the  first  born,  the  males  being  thus  specially  set 
apart  for  the  priesthood.  They  were  regarded  as  holy  unto  the 
Lord,  and  their  parents  brought  them  to  the  temple  and  presented 
them  to  God,  accompanied  with  an  appropriate  offering,  Ex.  xiii.  2, 
Numb.  viii.  17.  In  accordance  with  these  directions,  Jesus  was 
circumcised  on  the  eighth  day  after  his  birth,  and  presented  unto 
the  Lord  in  the  temple  at  the  end  of  forty  days  by  Joseph  and 
Mary. 

The  relation  which  God  bears  to  children  as  their  Creator  and  his 
claims  to  them,  their  moral  wants  and  the  blessings  necessary  to 
supply  them  and  secure  their  spiritual  interests,  are  not  limited  to 
periods,  but  remain  the  same  in  all  generations.  The  reasons  which 
induced  God  to  require  parents  to  present  their  children  to  him  dur- 
ing the  Jewish,  would  lead  him  to  make  the  same  requisition  upon 
them  in  the  Christian  dispensation.  And  as  the  distinctions  be- 
tween Jew  and  Gentile,  male  and  female,  the  first-born  child  and  the 
other  children,  were  all  to  be  removed,  it  was  necessary  that  cir- 
cumcision, which  was  more  particularly  adapted  to  such  limitations, 
should  be  superseded.  And  as  by  faith  the  Gentiles  became  the 
seed  of  Abraham,  and  male  and  female  became  one  in  Christ,  and 
every  believer  became  sanctified  unto  God,  and  every  child  of  a  be- 
lieving parent  became  "  holy  "  unto  the  Lord,  it  became  necessary 
that  a  rite  should  be  substituted  for  circumcision,  adapted  to  the 
universality  which  was  to  characterize  the  Christian  dispensation  ; 
and  Baptism  was  chosen  to  meet  all  these  requisitions. 

It  would,  therefore,  be  expected  that  provision  should  be  made 
for  the  presentation  of  children  to  God  in  the  Christian  Church. 
This,  it  seems  to  us,  is  clearly  taught  by  Paul  (i  Cor.  vii.  14):  "For 
the  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified  by  the  wife,  and  the  unbeliev- 
ing wife  is  sanctified  by  the  husband.  Else  were  your  children  un- 
clean, but  now  are  they  holy."  According  to  the  ceremonial  law 
certain  things  were  regarded  as  clean  (holy),  and  others  as  unclean. 
The  unclean  could  not  be  offered  to  God,  and  that  which  was  holy 
would  alone  be  accepted  by  him.     Now,  Paul  declares  that  accord- 


BAPTISM.  303 

ing  to  divine  arrangement,  the  faith  of  the  beh'eving  husband  or  wife 
so  sanctifies  the  unbeHeving  one  that  the  children  born  to  them  be- 
come holy,  and  can  properly  be  offered  unto  the  Lord.  This  idea, 
with  which  the  Jews  were  so  familiar,  and  under  the  promptings  of 
which  they  had  been  accustomed  to  present  their  children  to  God 
for  ages,  doubtless  actuated  the  parents  who  brought  their  infants  to 
Christ,  induced  him  to  accept  them,  and  led  him  to  institute  Bap- 
tism as  a  rite,  in  all  respects  adapted  to  the  presentation  of  children 
to  God,  and  their  consecration  to  his  service.  Accordingly,  the 
Confessors  taught  in  the  Article  under  consideration,  that  "children, 
through  Baptism,  are  presented  or  offered  to  God,"  received  into 
his  favor,  and  recognized  as  his  sons  and  daughters. 

2.  Baptism  is  Adapted  to  tJic  Religions  Training  of  Chi/dreJi.  A 
child  is  born  into  the  world  in  a  state  of  ignorance,  depravit}'  and 
helplessness.  It  is  endowed  with  intellectual  and  moral  faculties, 
upon  the  proper  development  of  which  will  depend  its  course  of 
conduct  and  character  in  this  life,  as  well  as  its  destiny  in  that  which 
is  to  come.  Accordingly  God  has  made  ample  provision  in  the 
establishment  of  His  Church  for  the  religious  training  of  the  young. 

The  process  through  which  the  results  of  religious  training  may 
be  secured  in  the  Church,  is  represented  in  the  Scriptures  as 
analagous  to  that  through  which  the  results  of  culture  are  attained 
in  nature.  A  plant,  remaining  in  its  original  position  and  subjected 
to  the  forces  of  nature  surrounding  it,  will  grow  to  maturity  natur- 
ally. But  if  it  be  transplanted,  and  subjected  to  a  change  of  climate, 
soil,  light,  heat  and  moisture,  it  may  be  greatly  modified  in  size, 
form,  texture,  and  even  in  its  nature.  Every  child  naturally  en- 
gendered "is  conceived  and  born  in  sin,"  and  if  left  to  develop,  "its 
evil  desires  and  propensities  "  under  the  influence  of  the  errors  and 
example  of  the  world,  it  will  grow  up  in  wickedness,  and  remain  a 
child  of  wrath,  exposed  to  condemnation.  But  throuo-h  Infant  Bap- 
tism, a  child  may  be  taken  up  from  the  world,  initiated  into  the 
Church,  subjected  to  Christian  nurture,  and  transformed  by  bap- 
tismal grace  into  a  child  of  God  and  an  heir  of  eternal  life.  Further- 
more, by  strewing  the  pollen  of  one  species  of  plant  upon  the  pistils 
of  another,  a  still  greater  modification  may  be  effected  and  a  new 
variety  of  plant  produced,  whose  life-force  will  differ  from  and  yet 
resemble  that  of  each  of  the  parent  plants.  And  in  like  manner 
may  the  animal  and  rational  life  of  a  child  be  so  modified  under  the 


304  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

forces  of  baptismal  grace  and  Christian  nurture,  as  to  become  a 
spiritual  life  differing  from  each  and  yet  resembling  both.  It  still 
retains  its  animal  life  with  its  appetitive  propensities,  as  well  as  its 
rational  life  with  its  intellectual  and  moral  faculties ;  but  the  spiritual 
life,  superinduced  upon  them  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  becomes  regnant 
over  both,  and  through  conscience,  its  motive  power,  regulates  the 
appetitive  cravings  of  the  animal,  as  well  as  the  moral  dictates  of  the 
rational  nature,  and  thus  secures  the  end  of  religious  training, 
"  walking  in  newness  of  life."  In  this,  according  to  Luther  "  con- 
sists the  efficacy  and  work  of  Baptism,  which  are  nothing  else  but 
the  mortification  of  the  old  Adam,  and  afterwards  the  rearing  up  of 
the  new  man,  both  of  which  are  to  be  pursued  through  our  whole 
life,  so  that  a  Christian  life  is  nothing  more  than  a  daily  Baptism, 
once  begun  and  ever  to  be  continued." 

In  the  light  of  Christian  nurture,  Infant  Baptism  attains  its  special 
significance  and  value.  No  degree  of  natural  culture  through 
purely  rational  means,  can  ever  attain  a  transformation  of  nature 
and  produce  spiritual  results.  Religious  training,  without  Infant 
Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace,  becomes  a  human  experiment, 
without  any  divine  arrangement  or  special  provision.  The  expec- 
tation may,  indeed,  be  cherished,  that  the  desired  result  will  be 
attained,  but  it  cannot  carry  with  it  the  assurance  given  by  God  to 
parents  who  dedicate  their  children  to  him  in  Baptism,  and  bring 
them  up  "  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord,"  and  to  whom 
he  thus  seals  the  promise  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  that  he  will  be  a 
God  unto  them,  and  their  seed  after  them  in  all  generations. 

Its  Complement. 

The  Christian  Church,  being  a  development  of  the  Jewish,  retains 
many  of  its  distinguishing  characteristics,  as  well  as  religious  cus- 
toms. Every  Jewish  male  child  was  presented  to  the  Lord,  entered 
into  covenant  with  him,  the  promise  of  which  was  sealed  to  it  by 
circumcision.  The  child  thus  became  a  member  of  the  Church  of 
God.  But  as  church  membership  required  a  profession  of  faith  and 
obedience,  and  as  the  child  was,  by  reason  of  its  undeveloped  capac- 
ities, incapable  of  making  the  requisite  vow  itself,  the  parent  was 
required  to  make  it  in  its  name.  That  vow,  according  to  the  divine 
constitution  of  the  family,  was  as  obligatory  upon  the  child  as  if  it 
had  been  made  by  itself,  and  it  was  thereby  pledged  to  assume  and 


BAPTISM.  305 

fulfil  it  as  soon  as  it  arrived  at  the  age  of  discretion.  It  was  en- 
joined upon  parents  to  explain  to  their  children  the  import  of 
religious  ordinances,  to  remind  them  of  the  nature  and  requirements 
of  the  vow  made  for  them  at  their  circumcision,  and  to  urge  them 
to  ratify  the  same  in  their  own  name.  It  was  expected,  that  under 
the  moulding  power  of  religious  training,  carried  on  in  the  family 
and  seconded  by  the  instructions  of  the  Church,  every  child  would 
be  fully  prepared  to  make  a  personal  profession  of  religion  at  the  age 
of  thirteen,  when  the  circumcised  children  were  called  upon  to  con- 
firm their  vows,  and  were  declared,  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  to 
be  the  sons  of  the  congregation  of  Israel. 

Infant  membership,  with  all  its  Jewish  concomitants,  save  that 
Baptism  has  taken  the  place  of  circumcision,  is  retained  in  the 
Christian  Church.  The  ancient  covenant  still  stands — children  are 
still  commanded  to  enter  into  it — they  are  still  unable  to  act  for 
themselves — their  parents  are  still  bound  to  consecrate  them  to  God, 
and  make  the  required  vows  in  their  name,  as  well  as  to  "bring 
them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord."  The  Church 
is  still  obligated  to  recognize  their  membership  and  provide  them 
with  a  religious  training — the  children  are  still  bound  at  the  age  of 
discretion  to  ratify  the  vows  made  in  their  name  at  their  Baptism — 
and  "the  laying  on  of  hands  "  is  still  retained  as  the  most  significant, 
appropriate  and  impressive  mode  of  making  a  profession  of  religion, 
and  they  are  thereby  recognized  as  full  members  of  the  Christian 
Church  and  entitled  to  all  its  privileges. 

This  form  of  profession  was  called  Confirmation.  It  originated 
among  the  Jews;  it  was  adopted  by  the  Church  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, and  retained  by  the  Confessors  of  the  Lutheran  Church  "as  a 
rite  transmitted  to  us  from  the  Fathers."  Confirmation  is,  con- 
sequently, the  complement  of  Infant  Baptism.  Infant  Baptism  is 
the  antecedent.  Confirmation  its  consequent.  In  Infant  Baptism, 
the  child  was  dedicated  to  God  by  its  parents;  in  Confirmation,  it 
dedicates  itself  to  Him.  In  Infant  Baptism,  the  child  entered  into 
covenant  with  God  by  substitution;  in  Confirmation,  it  ratifies  that 
^covenant  in  person.  Through  Infant  Baptism,  the  child  was  placed 
in  the  school  of  Christ;  in  Confirmation,  it  is  recognized  as  a  trained 
disciple  of  Christ.  In  Infant  Baptism,  the  grace  of  God  was  offered 
and  conferred ;  in  Confirmation,  its  transforming  power  is  exemplified. 
In   Infant  Baptism,  the  child  was  apprenticed  and  subjected  to  a 


306  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

course  of  preparation ;  in  Confirmation,  it  enters  upon  the  practice  of 
the  good  profession  of  Christianity.  By  Infant  Baptism,  the  child 
is  admitted  into  the  family  of  God,  but  although  he  be  an  heir,  he 
is  kept,  during  his  minority,  "  under  tutors  and  governors  until  the 
time  appointed  by  the  Father;"  in  Confirmation  he  is  recognized  as 
"lord  of  all,"  and  put  in  possession  of  his  promised  inheritance,  em- 
bracing all  spiritual  blessings  on  earth,  and  eventually  the  enjoy- 
ment of  immortal  glory  in  heaven. 

Its  Rejectors. 

These  are  described  by  the  Confessors  as  follows : 

"  The  Anabaptists,  who  teach  that  Infant  Baptism  is  improper, 
and  that    children   are    saved   without    Baptism,   are   condemned." 

Their  erroneous  sentiments  are  more  fully  set  forth  in  the  Form 
of  Concord.     They  maintained  the  following  propositions : 

"  I.  That  infants,  which  are  not  baptized,  are  not  sinners  in  the 
sight  of  God,  but  are  righteous  and  innocent ;  and  that,  consequently, 
in  their  innocence  they  are  saved  without  Baptism,  of  which  they 
have  no  need.  Thus  they  deny  and  reject  the  whole  doctrine  con- 
cerning original  sin,  and  all  that  is  connected  with  it." 

"  2.  That  infants  are  not  to  be  baptized,  until  they  attain  the  use 
of  their  reason,  and  are  able  to  make  a  confession  of  faith  them- 
selves." 

"  3.  That  the  children  of  Christians,  since  they  are  born  of  Chris- 
tian and  believing  parents,  are  holy  and  the  children  of  God,  even 
without  and  prior  to  Baptism.  For  this  reason  they  do  not  highly 
esteem  Infant  Baptim,  nor  promote  it;  contrary  to  the  express 
words  of  the  promise  of  God,  which  extends  to  those  alone  who 
keep  his  covenant  and  do  not  despise  it.     Gen.  xvii.  9,  10." 

The  errors  of  the  Anabaptists,  condemned  by  the  Confessors, 
embrace  the  denial  of  Pedo,  as  distinguished  from  Adult  Baptism, 
the  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  Original  Sin,  and  the  maintenance  of 
the  salvation  of  infants  on  the  ground  of  their  natural  innocence  and 
holiness.  Inasmuch,  however,  as  these  errors  are  refuted  in  the 
general  discussion  of  the  subject,  no  direct  refutation  is  deemed  nee-* 
essary  here,  and  we,  therefore,  content  ourselves  with  the  simple 
statement  of  them  as  found  above.  The  principal  objections  made 
by  the  Anabaptists  to  Infant  Baptism,  are  the  following : 

I.  That  there  is  no  scriptural  warrant  for  Infant  Baptism.     For 


BAPTISM.  307 

an  answer  to  this  we  refer  to  the  argument  already  presented,  under 
the  head  of  the  subjects  of  Baptism. 

2.  That  faith  is  a  universal  prerequisite  to  the  reception  of  Bap- 
tism, and  that  as  children  cannot  believe,  they  are  not  proper 
subjects  of  Baptism.  To  the  assertion  that  faith  is  universally 
demanded  as  a  prerequisite  for  Baptism,  we  reply  that  it  is  con- 
tradicted by  an  examination  of  all  the  passages  contained  in  the 
Scriptures  referring  to  the  subject.  Nothing  is  said  about  faith  as 
the  indispensable  condition  of  Baptism,  even  in  the  words  of  the 
institution,  as  contained  in  Matthew,  and  the  same  is  true  of  the 
great  majority  of  the  scriptural  references  to  Baptism.  There  are, 
however,  a  number  of  passages  in  which  faith  and  repentance  are 
made  conditional  for  Baptism.  The  true  interpretation  of  the  bap- 
tismal passages  must,  therefore,  be  sought  in  the  practice  of  the 
inspired  writers.  An  examination  of  all  the  examples  of  Baptism 
administered  by  the  Apostles  proves  that  they  invariably  insisted 
upon  the  exercise  of  repentance  and  faith  for  the  reception  of  Bap- 
tism on  the  part  of  adults,  and  just  as  invariably  administered  Bap- 
tism to  the  children  composing  their  households,  without  requiring 
the  exercise  of  faith  from  them. 

To  the  assertion  that  children  cannot  believe  or  have  faith,  we 
reply  that  the  Confessors  did  not  hold  that  unconscious  infants  had 
truth  apprehending  and  appropriative  faith.  When  they  describe 
the  characteristics  of  justifying,  regenerating,  sanctifying  and  saving 
faith,  they  have  reference  to  adults  and  not  to  infants.  The  faith  of 
infants  is  not  affirmed  in  the  Confession,  the  subject  is  only  inci- 
dentally alluded  to  in  the  Larger  Catechism,  and  the  individual 
sentiments  of  Luther  are  not  quoted  in  any  of  the  Symbolical  Books. 
And  even  he  only  maintained  that  children  had  faith  in  a  technical 
sense,  and  held  it  more  as  a  matter  of  theological  hypothesis,  then 
as  a  positive  dogma.  He,  accordingly,  wisely  abstained  from  intro- 
ducing it  either  into  the  definition  of  Baptism  contained  in  the 
Smalcald  Articles,  or  the  Small  Catechism,  and  in  the  Larger  one 
delivered  the  whole  question  about  the  faith  of  children  to  the 
Doctors  as  one  of  secondary  importance.  From  all  of  which  it 
becomes  manifest,  that  the  theory  of  the  Anabaptists,  that  evangel- 
ical faith  is  an  indispensable  prerequisite  for  the  reception  of  Bap- 
tism, does  not  interpret  all  the  passages  of  Scripture  pertaining  to 
the  subject;  that  the  individual  hypothesis  of  Luther,  that  children 


308  "  AUGSBURG"  CONFESSION. 

have  faith,  and,  consequently,  meet  the  universal  requirement  de- 
manded of  adults,  interprets  the  baptismal  passages  no  better;  but 
the  theor}^  of  the  Confessors,  that  Baptism  is  to  be  administered  to 
adults  as  well  as  to  their  children  on  the  ground  of  the  faith  of  the 
parents  alone,  and  not  on  that  of  their  infant  offspring,  does  interpret 
every  inspired  declaration  concerning  Baptism,  and  therefore  proves 
itself  to  be  the  theory  of  Christ,  illustrated  by  his  Apostles. 

3.  That  the  benefits  of  the  sacraments  can  only  be  secured 
through  faith,  and  as  children  can  have  no  faith,  Baptism  can  con- 
fer on  them  no  benefits.  We  have  already  seen,  that  in  the  earlier 
statements  of  Luther,  the  theory  was  stoutly  maintained  that  faith 
was  indispensable  to  the  reception  of  the  benefits  of  the  sacrament, 
and  that  children  had  faith,  and  in  consequence  thereof  became  par- 
ticipants of  its  blessings.  We  have,  however,  also  seen  that  he  sub- 
sequently modified  his  theory  in  these  respects,  and  expressed  him- 
self in  a  different  manner.  He  accordingly  says  in  his  letter  on 
Anabaptism,  as  already  quoted:  "  Faith  indeed  is  not  for  the  promo- 
tion of  Baptism,  but  Baptism  for  the  promotion  of  faith."  In  accord- 
ance with  this  sentiment  the  Confessors  declare  that  children  are 
baptized  in  order  that  they  may  become  participants  of  the  promises 
of  grace  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  in  his  own  time  and  place,  works 
faith  in  them,  through  which  all  the  treasures  of  the  gospel,  offered 
in  Baptism,  become  their  inheritance. 

4.  That  the  predication  of  any  blessing  as  the  result  of  Infant 
Baptism,  led  unavoidably  to  a  magical  opus  opcratum.  In  regard  to 
the  divine  operations  in  general,  the  Confessors  rejected  the  fanati- 
cal notions  of  the  enthusiasts,  that  God  works  in  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  men  "  by  a  secret  inspiration  or  a  peculiar  divine  revela- 
tion." Relative  to  the  efficacy  of  the  sacraments,  we  have  seen  that 
they  rejected  the  error  of  the  Dominicans,  "  that  God  has  placed  a 
spiritual  power  in  the  water,"  as  well  as  that  of  the  Franciscans, 
"  that  Baptism  washes  away  sins  through  the  will  of  God."  The 
opus  operatiiJii  of  the  Romanists,  with  its  magical  operation,  they 
condemn  as  follows:  "Our  opponents  have  no  certainty,  nor  can 
they  correctly  tell  us,  or  state  in  clear  and  intelligible  terms,  how 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  given.  They  dream  that  by  the  simple  bodily 
reception  and  use  of  the  sacraments,  ex  opere  operato,  we  obtain 
grace  and  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,  although  the  heart  be  entirely 
absent,  as  if  the  light  of  the  Holy  Ghost  were  so  worthless,  weak 


BAPTISM.  309 

and  futile."  The  Confessors  held  that  there  was  but  one  Baptism, 
which  was  the  means  of  imparting  the  Holy  Spirit  to  adult  believers, 
and  as  that  same  Baptism  was  to  be  administered  to  their  children, 
and  as  their  children  needed  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  just  as 
much  as  their  parents,  it  must,  unless  it  should  become  a  different 
species  of  Baptism,  be  the  means  of  conferring  on  them  the  Holy 
Spirit  also.  The  manner  in  which  this  takes  place  is  through  the 
administration  of  the  ordinance  according  to  the  Scriptures,  on  the 
ground  of  the  faith  of  the  parents,  and  in  answer  to  the  prayers  of 
the  administrator,  as  the  representative  of  the  Church  and  the  min- 
ister of  God. 

5.  That  to  enter  into  covenant  presupposes  voluntary  and  intelli- 
gent action,  and  as  children  are  incapable  of  apprehending  and  as- 
senting to  the  terms  of  a  covenant,  no  moral  obligation  can  be  im- 
posed, and  no  special  blessings  can  be  conferred  upon  them  through 
Baptism.  In  reply  to  this  it  must  suffice  to  say,  that  God  did, 
nevertheless,  call  upon  children  to  enter  into  covenant  with  him  ; 
that  he  sealed  unto  them,  through  circumcision,  great  and  invalu- 
able blessings  ;  that  he  threatened  to  cut  off  every  child  that  did  not 
in  like  manner  enter  into  covenant  with  him ;  that  on  great  public 
occasions,  the  children  of  the  Israelites  were  present,  and  received 
special  mention  as  entering  into  covenant  with  God  as  well  as  the 
adults,  and  thus  became  heirs  with  their  fathers  of  all  the  blessings 
of  the  covenant  of  promise.  And  as  children  were  embraced  in  the 
covenants  made  by  the  parents,  so  too  were  they  obliged  to  fulfil 
the  stipulations  thereof,  according  to  the  divine  arrangement,  just  as 
much  as  if  they  had  intelligently  and  voluntarily  entered  into  the 
covenant  themselves.  And  the  same  is  true  in  regard  to  human 
covenants.  We,  as  children,  are  bound  by  the  covenants  made  by 
our  fathers,  and  our  children  are  bound  by  the  compacts  which  we 
may  make  and  ratify.  And  as  we  inherited  the  blessings  of  the 
covenants  of  our  fathers,  so  will  our  posterity  become  the  heirs  of 
the  inheritance  of  their  fathers,  as  well  as  ours,  to  the  remotest 
generations. 

Conclusion. 

From    the   foregoing  discussion  of  the  subject  of  Baptism,  the 
character  of  the  Confessors  as  reformers,  and  the  manner  in  which 
they  accomplished  the  work  of  the  great  Reformation,  become  man- 
21 


3IO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ifest.  And  while  they  thus  transmit  to  us  the  treasures  of  wisdom 
gathered  by  them  from  the  fields  of  experience,  observation  and  the 
Scriptures,  they  not  only  challenge  our  admiration,  but  they  become 
to  us,  their  ecclesiastical  descendants,  worthy  examples  for  our 
imitation. 

In  their  presentation  of  the  subject  of  Infant  Baptism,  the  Con- 
fessors exhibit  both  unity  and  diversity  of  sentiment.  They  agreed 
in  confessing  that  Infant  Baptism  has  the  divine  sanction;  that 
through  it  grace  is  offered  to  children ;  that  the  grace  thus  offered 
embraces  remission  of  sins  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  that 
children  being  thus  offered  to  God,  become  acceptable  to  him,  and 
are  received  into  his  favor.  They  differed  in  regard  to  the  question 
whether  children  had  faith,  and  in  what  sense  this  could  be  consist- 
ently affirmed,  the  precise  effects  produced  by  the  operation  of  the 
Spirit  on  their  minds  and  hearts,  as  well  as  in  regard  to  the  precise 
period,  manner  and  degree  of  his  influence  upon  them.  In  so  far  as 
they  allowed  themselves  to  refer  to  this  aspect  of  the  subject  at  all, 
they  did  so  with  great  circumspection,  and  expressed  their  various 
shades  of  thought  in  different  terms. 

On  Baptism,  as  was  their  wont  on  almost  all  disputed  subjects, 
the  Confessors  took  a  medium  position.  The  extremes,  which  in 
the  providence  of  God  had  arisen  in  the  Church,  were  those  cham- 
pioned by  Rome  and  Munster.  Between  the  magical  opus  operatimi 
of  the  Romanists,  and  the  spiritualistic  fanaticism  of  the  Anabaptists^ 
they  were  called  upon  to  choose.  Under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit, 
they  took  their  position  midway  between  these  extremes,  and  ex- 
pressed their  judgment  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.  And  so  clear 
and  scriptural  did  their  doctrine  appear,  that  it  met  not  only  with 
the  approval  of  the  Lutherans,  but  also  with  that  of  the  Reformed. 
At  Marburg,  Zwingli  and  his  associates  formally  endorsed  it,  and 
the  representatives  of. the  Reformed  did  the  same  at  the  Wittenberg 
Conference.  The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  Baptism,  unitedly  confessed 
in  the  Wittenberg  Concordia,  as  given  by  Dorner,  was  as  follows  : 
"  The  promise  was  valid  also  for  infants,  and  was  to  be  appropriated 
to  them  through  the  ministrations  of  the  Church.  Without  regen- 
eration there  was,  even  for  infants,  no  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  Infants  indeed  had  no  understanding,  but  the  Holy  Ghost 
exercised  his  power  in  them  according  to  their  measure,  and  thereby 
they  pleased  God.     The  way  and  manner  of  these  operations  were 


BAPTISM.  31  I 

unknown,  but  it  was  certain  that  there  were  in  them  new  and  holy 
impulses,  the  inclination  to  believe  in  Christ  and  to  love  God,  which 
was  in  a  certain  measure  similar  to  the  movements  of  those  which 
are  otherwise  possessed  of  faith  and  love." 

The  Confessors  in  setting  forth  the  doctrine  of  Baptism,  expressed 
their  opinions  with  marked  wisdom  and  great  moderation.  The 
proof  of  this  will  at  once  become  apparent,  by  comparing  the  decla- 
rations, both  as  individuals  and  Confessors,  with  those  of  the  theo- 
logians and  Confessors  of  other  denominations.  The  Westminster 
Confession  says:  "The  efficacy  of  Baptism  is  not  tied  to  that  mo- 
ment of  time  wherein  it  is  administered,  yet,  notwithstanding,  by  the 
right  use  of  this  ordinance,  the  grace  promised  is  not  only  offered, 
but  really  exhibited  and  conferred  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  such 
(whether  of  age  or  infants)  as  that  grace  belongeth  unto,  according 
to  the  counsel  of  God's  own  will  in  his  appointed  time."  The 
Heidelberg  Catechism  declares  "  That  Christ  appointed  this  external 
washing  with  water,  adding  thereto  this  promise,  that  I  am  as  cer- 
tainly washed  by  his  blood  and  Spirit  from  all  the  pollution  of  my 
soul,  that  is  from  all  my  sins,  as  I  am  washed  externally  with 
water;"  that  to  be  thus  baptized,  "is  to  receive  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  also  to  be  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost;"  and  that,  "as 
infants,  as  well  as  the  adult,  are  included  in  the  covenant  and  Church 
of  God,  and  since  redemption  from  sin  by  the  blood  of  Christ  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  author  of  faith,  is  promised  to  them  no  less 
than  to  the  adult,  they  must  therefore,  by  Baptism,  as  a  sign  of.the 
covenant,  be  also  admitted  into  the  Christian  Church,"  etc.  Wesley, 
as  quoted  by  Curteis,  says:  "It  is  certain,  that  our  Church  (the 
Episcopal)  supposes  that  all  who  are  baptized  in  their  infancy  are  at 
the  same  time  'born  again,'  and  it  is  allowed,  that  the  whole  office 
for  the  baptism  of  infants,  proceeds  upon  this  supposition."  Dr. 
Heppe,  a  distinguished  modern  Reformed  theologian,  in  presenting 
quotations  from  Calvinistic  authors,  quotes  Polanus  as  testif3Mng, 
"That  to  those  who  are  baptized,  it  is  signified  and  sealed,  that  they 
(to  whom  the  covenant  of  grace  pertaineth)  are  received  into  the 
communion  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  are  inserted  into  Christ,  and 
his  mystic  body  the  Church,  are  justified  by  God,  for  the  sake  of 
Christ's  blood  shed  for  us,  and  regenerated  by  Christ's  Spirit."  In 
order  to  estimate  the  force  of  these  Calvinistic  quotations,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  grace  of  Baptism  is  held  to  pertain  to  the 


312  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

children  of  the  elect,  as  well  as  to  the  parents  themselves.  In  com- 
parison with  the  above  confessional  deliverances,  those  of  the  Luth- 
eran Confessors  must  be  regarded  as  mild;  and  in  comparison  with 
the  declarations  of  Heppe,  and  those  heretofore  quoted  of  Calvin, 
and  Drs.  Miller  and  Alexander,  those  of  Luther  and  Melanchthon, 
as  already  presented,  appear  very  moderate. 

The  Confessors  also  discriminate  in  their  confessional  writings  with 
special  care  between  Adult  and  Infant  Baptism,  and  in  this  respect 
imitate  the  sacred  writers.  Christ  and  his  Apostles  exhibit  the 
doctrine  of  Baptism  in  general,  the  qualifications  for  its  reception, 
its  relation  to  the  remission  of  sins,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
regeneration  and  sanctification,  union  with  Christ,  church  member- 
ship and  salvation,  in  clear  and  positive  terms.  These  representa- 
tions are  of  such  a  character  as  to  convince  the  great  majority  of 
Christians  that  Infant  Baptism  is  taught  and  involved  in  them. 
And  as  there  is  but  one  Baptism  instituted  by  Christ,  and  as  that 
was  administered  to  adult  believers  and  their  children,  it  follows 
that  whatever  grace  it  is  the  specific  office  of  Baptism  to  confer,  of 
which  children  stand  in  need  and  are  capable  of  receiving,  it  must 
offer  and  confer  upon  them.  Nevertheless,  the  inspired  writers 
abstain  from  declaring  in  express  terms,  what  the  specific  benefits  of 
Infant  Baptism  are,  and  leave  them  to  be  inferred  from  their  general 
teaching  on  the  subject.  And  this  is  precisely  the  course  pursued 
by  the  Confessors.  They  take  up  the  adult  believer  and  assure 
him  that  by  Baptism  he  is  "born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,"  and 
that  it  is  to  him  "the  washing  of  regeneration,"  through  which  he 
may  be  "sanctified"  and  "saved."  But  when  they  come  to  treat  of 
Infant  Baptism  in  particular,  they  go  no  farther  than  to  declare  that 
grace  is  offered  through  Baptism ;  that  children  are  thereby  pre- 
sented to  God,  who,  through  such  Baptism,  become  acceptable  to 
him,  and  are  received  into  his  favor.  And  in  explanation  of  this 
they  content  themselves  with  the  assurance,  that  the  promises  of 
grace  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  belong  to  children  as  well  as  to  adults, 
and  that  they  are  baptized  in  order  that  they  may  become  partakers 
thereof 

In  the  domain  of  philosophy  it  has  often  occurred  that  the  disci- 
ples of  the  great  masters  have  misapprehended  their  tenets,  and 
perverted  their  principles,  and  thus  become  the  propagandists  of 
errors,  which  were  baneful  in  their  tendencies,  and  brought  reproach 


BAPTISM.  313 

upon  their  names  and  systems.  And  the  same  thing  has  occurred 
in  the  domain  of  symboHsm  in  the  Lutheran  Church.  The  wisdom 
and  moderation  of  the  Confessors  in  setting  forth  the  doctrine  of 
baptismal  grace,  have  not  always  been  imitated  by  those  professing 
the  Lutheran  name.  Their  conceptions,  forms  of  expression  and 
manner  of  applying  it,  were  discarded,  and  the  doctrine  so  perverted 
as  to  be  little,  if  any,  better  than  the  magical  opus  operatum  of  the 
Romanists.  Such  a  perversion  took  place  in  the  Pietistic  era  of  the 
Church.  "The  so-called  orthodox  opponents  of  Spener,"  says 
Dorner,  "  were  of  opinion  that  there  is  a  truly  spiritual  and  divine 
theology  even  of  the  unregenerate;"  that  "  piety  is  no  essential  re- 
quirement in  a  theologian,  for  the  apodictic  mark  of  a  true  teacher 
is  simply  correctness  of  doctrine;"  and  that  "saving  power  was 
transferred  to  knowledge  and  inward  experience  of  salvation  only 
inferred  from  purity  of  doctrine."  "  The  office  of  an  orthodox 
teacher,  even  if  he  be  ungodly,  is  self-efficacious.  With  this  were 
connected  hierarchial  notions  of  the  office  of  the  Church  and  of  so- 
called  official  grace.  *  *  Thus  the  continued  agency  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  was,  in  a  deistic  fashion,  abolished  by  the  ministry,  by  the 
Church  and  its  means  of  grace,  and  the  power  belonging  to  the 
Spirit  alone,  represented  as  abdicated  to  the.se  second  causes.  These 
were  no  longer  regarded  as  mere  media  for  his  operation,  but  as 
exercising  an  independent  agency,  wherever  access  was  allowed  to 
them.  A  regenerating  power  being  thus  attributed,  not  only  to  the 
sacraments,  but  to  correct  doctrine  and  to  notions,  in  the  case  of 
those  who  did  not  wickedly  oppose  them,  the  opus  operatum  of 
Romish  doctrine,  which  works  in  all  who  Tion  ponunt  obicem  was 
again  reached,  and  an  intellectual  Pelagianism  combined  with  a 
magical  effect  of  grace." 

Dr.  S.  Sprecher,  in  his  Holman  Lecture  on  Original  Sin  {Evan- 
gelical Review,  October,  1867),  presents  the  doctrine  of  the  Confes- 
sors as  follows:  "The  Confessors  declare  that  all  men  naturally 
engendered,  whether  infants  or  adults,  are  born  in  sin,  and  that  this 
inherent  disease  and  natural  depravity  is  sin,  and  still  condemns  and 
causes  eternal  death  to  all  who  are  not  born  again  by  Baptism  and 
the  Iloh'  Ghost.  *  *  j  need  not  say,  therefore,  that  the  Confes- 
sors do  not  mean  that  God  has  no  other  way  or  means  of  regenera- 
tion except  those  revealed  in  the  Bible,  or  that  unbaptized  infants, 
from  the  mere  absence  or  want  of  baptism,  are   unregenerated,  and 


314  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

djM'ng  in  infancy  are  unprepared  for  heav^en.  They  speak  only  of 
the  revealed  order  of  salvation,  the  way  into  which  the  gospel  calls 
us,  and  in  which  those  who  hear  the  gospel  have  the  only  sure  war- 
rant and  certain  pledge  of  regeneration.  To  subjects  who  have  not 
the  gospel,  or  are  incapable  of  receiving  it,  this  declaration  does  not 
refer.  For  aught  it  teaches,  all  infants,  baptized  and  unbaptized, 
may  be  regenerated  and  saved.  But  if  regenerated  and  saved,  they 
are  regenerated  and  saved  by  the  grace  of  God  alone." 

In  regard  to  the  perversion  of  the  doctrine  by  scholastic  distinc- 
tions. Dr.  Sprecher  says:  "Spener  deplored  the  effects  of  it  as  little 
better  than  those  of  the  Papal  opus  operation,  and  it  was  a  departure 
from  original  and  true  Lutheranism.  *  *  While  Spener  regarded 
the  conversion  of  Christians  who  had  fallen  into  spiritual  death,  as  a 
return  to  baptismal  grace,  yet  he  calls  such  conversion  explicitly 
and  emphatically  a  new  regeneration,  inasmuch  as  the  baptismal 
regeneration  (grace)  had  been  entirely  lost ;  and  regarding  this  as 
the  case  of  the  vast  majority  of  those  baptized  in  infancv,  he  treated 
all  who  did  not  exhibit  the  evidences  of  spiritual  life,  as  not  only 
unconverted,  but  unregenerate.  *  *  As  Luther  returned  to 
primitive  Christianity,  so  did  Spener  return  to  early  Lutheranism." 

The  terms  employed  by  the  Confessors,  and  the  precise  meaning 
attached  to  them  in  portraying  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace, 
deserve  special  consideration.  The  words  "  faith  "  and  "  regenera- 
tion," as  the  synonym  of  "being  born  again,"  and  "born  of  God," 
are  frequently  used  by  the  sacred  writers,  and  have  a  clear  and  well 
defined  meaning.  The  Holy  Ghost  works  faith  through  the  word 
and  sacraments,  and  whosoever  believes  on  the  Son  of  God  and  is 
baptized  is  begotten  of  the  word  of  truth,  "born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit,"  and  receives  "the  washing  of  regeneration  and  the  renewing 
of  the  Holy  Ghost."  In  this  sense  the  Confessors  employ  these 
terms  in  their  application  to  adults  ;  but  when  they  refer  to  Infant 
Baptism  and  its  effects,  both  in  the  Confession  and  the  Apology, 
they  employ  none  of  them,  and  express  themselves  in  the  general 
terms  already  quoted.  And  even  when  they  employ  the  words 
"faith"  and  "regeneration"  as  applicable  to  baptized  infants,  it  is 
done  in  a  technical  sense,  which,  in  order  to  prevent  misapprehen- 
sion, they  explain.  But  as  these  terms  have  their  fixed  meaning, 
and  will  be  understood  accordingly,  it  is  injudicious  to  use  them  in 
connection  with  Infant  Baptism,  without  careful  discrimination;  and 


BAPTISM.  315 

as  the  impression  made  by  their  ordinary  meanin^j  may  be  stronger 
than  that  made  by  the  explanation  of  their  technical  meaning,  it 
would,  perhaps,  be  better  to  imitate  the  Confessors  in  this  respect, 
and  not  employ  them  at  all  in  defining  Infant  Baptism.  We  have 
already  seen  that  Luther  affirmed  that  children  had  "faith,"  and 
how  he  explained  his  meaning  in  the  Wittenberg  Concordia.  He 
also  employed  the  term  "  regenerate  "  and  its  synonyms  in  his  Bap- 
tismal Formulas  just  as  it  had  been  used  in  the  Romish  service;  but 
while  he  did  this  in  deference  to  the  prejudices  of  the  people  who 
had  been  accustomed  to  it,  he  employed  it  in  the  Evangelical,  and 
not  in  the  Romish  sense.  He  tells  us  this  himself  "  I  did  not  wish 
to  alter  many  things,  though  I  could  have  wished  that  the  Form 
was  better  furnished.  For  it  had  careless  authors,  who  did  not  suffi- 
ciently consider  the  importance  of  Baptism.  But  I  leave  the  most 
part  unchanged,  lest  weak  consciences  complain  that  I  have  insti- 
tuted a  new  Baptism,  and  lest  those  already  baptized  complain  that 
they  are  not  rightly  baptized.  For,  as  has  been  observed,  human 
additions  are  not  of  much  consequence,  so  that  Baptism  is  itself 
administered  with  the  word  of  God,  true  faith,  and  earnest  calling 
upon  God." 

The  phrase  "  Baptismal  Regeneration,"  was  not  employed  by  the 
Confessors,  and  it  does  not  occur  in  the  Sj^mbolical  Books.  It  is 
true  that  as  the  '' ivasJiing  of  regeneration,"  in  Titus  iii.  5,  refers  to 
Baptism,  the  phrase  "'baptismal  regeneration "  would  be  its  scrip- 
tural equivalent.  But  as  it  is  not  specifically  applied  by  Paul  to 
baptized  infants,  and  as  it  is  generally  used  to  express  the  Romish 
doctrine  of  the  op2is  opcrauini,  it  cannot  be  employed  in  setting  forth 
the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  without  constant  liability 
to  misstatement  and  misapprehension. 

Dr.  A.  Alexander  (Religious  Experience,  p.  37,  38,)  says:  "If 
piety  may  commence  at  any  age,  how  solicitous  should  parents  be 
for  their  children,  that  God  would  bestow  his  grace  upon  them, 
even  before  they  know  their  right  hand  from  their  left.  And  when 
about  to  dedicate  them  to  God  in  Holy  Baptism,  liow  earnestly 
should  the\'  pray,  that  they  may  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost; 
that  while  their  bodies  are  washed  in  the  emblematic  laver  of  re- 
generation, their  souls  may  experience  the  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus.  If  the  sentiments 
expressed  above  be  correct,  then  maj-  there  be  such  a  thing  as  bap- 


31  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tisnial  regeneration :  not  that  the  mere  external  application  of  water 
can  have  any  effect  to  purify  the  soul,  nor  that  internal  grace  uni- 
formly or  generally  accompanies  this  external  washing,  but  that 
God,  who  works  when  and  by  what  means  he  pleases,  may  regener- 
ate by  his  Spirit  the  soul  of  the  infant,  while  in  his  sacred  name 
water  is  applied  to  the  body." 

In  his  Life  by  his  son,  Dr.  Alexander  refers  to  the  misapprehen- 
sion of  his  meaning  which  had  occurred,  as  follows:  "If,  however, 
I  had  foreseen  the  perversion  which  some  have  made  of  my  real 
opinion,  I  would  perhaps  have  avoided  the  use  of  the  phrase  "bap- 
tismal regeneration,"  but  I  have  clearly  explained  that  my  meaning 
was,  that  as  infants  are  capable  of  regeneration  before  the  use  of 
reason,  that  blessing  might  be  granted  at  the  moment  when  they 
were  made  the  subjects  of  an  ordinance  which  is  intended  to  give  an 
emblematical  representation  of  that  change." 

The  doctrine  of  "  baptismal  regeneration  "  has  been  defined  by  Dr. 
S.  S.  Schmucker,  as  follows:  "By  this  designation  is  meant  the 
doctrine  that  Baptism  is  necessarily  and  invariably  attended  by 
spiritual  regeneration,  and  that  such  water  Baptism  is  uncondi- 
tionally essential  to  salvation."  "  Regeneration  consists  in  a  radical 
change  in  our  religious  views  of  the  divine  character,  laws,  etc.,  a 
change  in  our  religious  feelings,  and  in  our  religious  purposes  and 
habits  of  action,  of  none  of  which  children  are  capable  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  term  regeneration."  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  (Conservative 
Reformation,  p.  565),  in  referring  to  the  above  statements,  says: 
"  The  charge  against  our  Church  as  teaching  'baptismal  regenera- 
tion,' as  those  who  make  the  charge  define  it,  is,  as  we  have  seen, 
utterly  ungrounded.  It  is  not  true  in  its  general  statement  nor  in 
its  details;  it  is  utterly  without  warrant  in  the  whole  or  in  a  singular 
particular."  And  this  denial  is  reiterated  by  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer  and 
Prof.  D.  Worley,  in  their  discussion  of  the  subject  contained  in  the 
Evangelical  Quarterly  Reviczv.  Stier  maintains  that  the  words 
spoken  in  Titus  iii.  5,6,  "cannot  hold  good  of  every  Baptism  of 
every  child,  and  that  while/?///  regeneration  cannot  be  predicated  of 
Infant  Baptism,  a  living  principle,  and  a  commencement  tending  to 
that  full  regeneration,  it  does  involve  in  spite  of  all  contradiction 
and  confusion  of  opinion."  And  he  agrees  with  Hoffman,  "  that 
only  in  Infant  Baptism,  the  nature  of  Baptism  is  exhibited  in  its 
purity  and  integrity,  as   it  is  the  first  receiving  of  the  gift  of  grace 


BAPTISM.  317 

unto  a  new  life,  while  an  adult  must  necessarily  brin^y  to  it  some- 
thing of  the  old,  inrooted,  personal  character  which  affects,  although 
it  may  be  in  a  very  small  degree,  the  reception  of  the  grace."  And 
this  opinion  receives  additional  force  from  the  fact,  that  the  Apostles 
and  their  adult  converts,  as  believers,  were  regenerated  by  the  Spirit 
through  the  word  as  a  spiritual  seed  and  not  through  Baptism,  and 
hence  they  and  all  others  like  them,  as  Gerhard  says,  "  haVe  no  need 
of  regeneration  through  Baptism,  but  to  them  Baptism  is  a  confir- 
mation and  sealing  of  regeneration,"  and  the  passages  referring  to 
Baptism  and  the  new  birth  are  accordingly  clothed  with  special  sig- 
nification when  applied  to  Infant  Baptism. 

The  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  held  by  the  Confessors,  involving 
as  it  does  the  moral  development  and  destiny  of  every  baptized 
child,  is  not  divested  of  all  difficulties.  But  to  those  who  admit  the 
conclusiveness  of  the  argument  for  Infant  Baptism,  and  the  specific 
office  of  Baptism,  as  the  divinely  appointed  means  of  sealing  the  re- 
mission of  sins  and  of  conferring  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  ex- 
pressly taught  by  Christ,  Peter,  Paul  and  Luke,  and  illustrated  by 
Apostolic  practice,  these  difficulties  will  by  no  means  appear  insuper- 
able. If  Baptism  be  a  means  of  grace,  and  there  be  but  one  Baptism, 
it  must,  when  administered  to  children,  be  the  medium  of  offering 
and  conferring  grace  upon  them.  And  if  Baptism  was  designed  to 
give  assurance  of  justification  and  impart  the  Spirit  of  regeneration, 
it  must,  unless  it  cease  to  be  Baptism,  perform  its  scriptural  office 
when  administered  to  children.  In  other  words.  Infant  Baptism 
must  be  Baptism,  and  not  some  other  ordinance.  As  those  who  hold 
the  doctrine  of  human  depravity,  readily  believe  that  God  through 
Infant  Baptism  cancels  the  penal  consequences  of  original  sin,  the 
remaining  difficulty  will  be,  to  believe  that  God  has  made  special 
provision  for  bestowing  upon  children  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  aid  them 
in  resisting  the  sin-enticing  power  of  their  depraved  natures.  And 
can  this  prove  a  stumbling  block  to  faith?     We  trow  not. 

Dr.  Alexander  says:  "It  is  an  interesting  question,  whether  now 
there  are  any  persons  sanctified  from  the  womb?  If  the  communi- 
cation of  grace  ever  took  place  at  so  early  a  period,  there  is  no 
reason  why  it  should  not  now  sometimes  occur.  *  *  As  we 
believe  that  infants  may  be  the  subjects  of  regeneration,  and  cannot 
be  saved  without  it.  why  may  it  not  be  the  fact  that  some  who  are 
regenerated  live  to  mature  age?"     If  these  questions  be  prompted 


3IO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

from  the  Calvinistic  standpoint:  of  the  particularity  of  grace,  they 
are  easily  answered  from  the  Lutheran  standpoint  of  the  universality 
of  grace.  No  good  reason  can  be  given,  why  grace  cannot  be  im- 
parted in  S07nc  cases  at  so  early  a  period,  but  many  reasons  can  be 
given  why  such  grace  may  be  imparted  in  all  cases  meeting  the 
scriptural  requirements  through  holy  Baptism. 

To  the  prophet  Jeremiah  it  was  said :  "  Before  thou  earnest  forth 
out  of  the  womb,  I  sanctified  thee."  David  declares  that  "the  Lord 
was  his  God  from  his  mother's  womb,"  and  that  he  made  him  to 
"  hope  from  his  mother's  breasts."  The  angel  Gabriel  declared,  that 
John  the  Baptist  should  "  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  his 
mother's  womb."  These  passages  prove  that  children  may  become 
the  subjects  of  divine  grace  and  receive  the  Holy  Spirit  from  birth  ; 
that  he  must  have  some  way  of  influencing  them;  that  by  such  in- 
fluence they  are  "sanctified"  and  become  the  children  of  God,  and 
that  adequate  reasons  existed  for  such  special  manifestations  of  grace 
to  children  in  both  dispensations.  These  declarations  ought  to  re- 
move the  difficulty  of  those  who  think  that  infants  are  incapable  of 
being  brought  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  who, 
through  their  chronological  and  metaphysical  speculations,  propose 
to  render  God  the  important  service  of  instructing  him  in  regard  to 
the  capacities  of  children,  and  the  operations  of  the  Spirit,  and  of 
guarding  him  against  a  work  of  supererogation  in  dispensing  his 
grace  to  them  through  Baptism  prematurely.  If  Enoch  and  Elijah 
were  bodily  translated  to  heaven,  and  Lazarus  and  Christ  raised 
from  the  dead,  to  illustrate  the  universality  of  the  doctrine  of  im- 
mortality and  the  resurrection,  why  may  not  the  sanctification  of 
Jeremiah  and  John  from  the  womb  illustrate  the  universality  of  the 
doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  conferred  upon  children  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  through  Infant  Baptism? 

The  early  piety  of  children  has  also  an  important  bearing  on  this 
subject.  Samuel  feared  the  Lord  from  his  earliest  years.  Timothy 
knew  the  Scriptures  and  was  made  wise  unto  salvation  from  child- 
hood. Dr.  Bushnell  refers  to  the  case  of  Baxter,  who  became  pious 
so  young,  that  he  could  not  remember  any  period  when  he  did  not 
love  and  trust  in  Jesus,  and  Dr.  Alexander  states  that  such  cases 
have  often  occurred.  President  Edwards  mentions  the  case  of 
Phoebe  Bartlett,  and  other  manifestations  of  the  Spirit's  work  in  the 
conversion  of  very  young  children  in  his  day ;  and  the  examples  of 


BAPTISM.  319 

early  piety  in  the  family  and  the  Sunday-schools  in  our  day,  may 
be  counted  by  thousands.  Now  Luther  in  the  Larger  Catechism, 
and  Melanchthon  in  the  Apology,  state  that  God  gave  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  many  who  were  baptized  in  their  infancy,  and  regard  it 
not  only  as  an  argument  in  favor  of  Infant  Baptism,  but  also  of  the 
truth  of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace. 

Every  child  has  an  animal  and  a  rational  nature,  whose  respective 
developments  commence  from  birth.  The  motive  power  of  the 
animal  nature  is  exerted  through  appetite,  that  of  the  rational  nature 
through  conscience.  Now,  as  the  world  and  Satan  may  influence 
the  animal  nature  to  do  evil,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  provided  to  influ- 
ence the  rational  nature  to  do  good.  Adequate  provision  is  thus 
made  to  counteract  the  development  of  depravity,  and  to  secure  the 
development  of  piety.  But  if  baptismal  grace  be  denied  to  children, 
then  will  the  flesh,  the  world  and  the  devil  have  free  course,  and 
childhood  be  left  helpless  and  exposed  to  their  corrupting  influ- 
ences, without  any  supernatural  assistance  during  the  formative 
period  of  life,  in  determining  its  course  and  in  forming  its  character. 
And  if  this  be  true,  then  must  the  declaration,  that  "  where  sin 
abounded  "  through  Adam,  "grace  did  much  more  abound"  through 
Christ,  be  regarded  rather  as  a  rhetorical  flourish  than  as  a  veritable 
fact,  and  such  deficiency  stand  out  as  a  glaring  and  unaccountable 
inconsistency  in  the  economy  of  grace  and  redemption.  Every 
child  has  constitutionally  a  disposition  to  love  and  trust  its  parents. 
This  disposition  manifests  itself  very  early,  and  becomes  the  ground 
of  piety,  that  is  of  obedience  towards  its  parents,  prompted  by  faith 
and  love.  Now,  as  it  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  shed  abroad 
the  love  of  God  in  the  heart,  why  may  he  not,  by  a  superinduction 
of  divine  grace,  so  dispose  the  heart  of  a  child,  that  its  constitutional 
capacity  for  piety  towards  its  parents  may  become  also  a  gracious 
capacity  for  piety  towards  God  ?  And  as  it  is  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  take  the  things  of  Christ  and  show  them  to  the  soul,  the 
child,  as  it  is  made  acquainted  with  Christ,  will  be  able  spiritually 
to  discern  him,  and  its  gracious  capacity  to  love,  trust,  and  obey 
him  will  become  manifest,  and  constitute  Christian  piety.  And  in 
this  manner,  the  Spirit  will  work  faith,  as  well  as  to  will  and  to  do, 
in  the  mind  and  heart  of  a  child,  in  his  own  time  and  in  his  own 
way.  And  that  such  manifestations  of  baptismal  grace  are  not  only 
possible  but  actual,  the  history  of  Christian  nurture  in  the  churches 
holding  it  abundantly  proves. 


320  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  apprehension  that  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  would 
prove  practically  detrimental  to  experimental  piety,  is  based  upon 
misapprehension.  The  doctrines  concerning  faith,  repentance,  con- 
version, regeneration  and  sanctification,  when  appr^ended  and 
received,  become  the  source  of  religious  experience  and  practical 
piety.  But  no  uninspired  men  ever  lived  who  understood  and 
preached  these  doctrines  more  clearly  and  effectively  than  Luther 
and  the  Reformers,  Spener  and  the  Pietists,  Muhlenberg  and  the 
fathers  of  the  American  Lutheran  Church.  The  modern  spiritual- 
istic reformers,  who  charge  them  with  promoting  formalism  and 
self-righteousness,  and  who  claim  a  monopoly  of  experimental 
piety,  would  do  well  to  sit  at  their  feet  as  learners,  and  from  their 
writings  and  example  correct  their  fanatical  notions  of  religious  ex- 
perience, as  well  as  mend  their  inconsistent  lives.  The  Confessors 
held  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace,  and  through  the  consistent  use 
of  it,  became  the  authors  of  the  Reformation;  the  Pietists,  the  pro- 
moters of  the  revival  of  true  Lutheranism  ;  and  the  Hallean  Fathers, 
the  founders  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America. 

The  tendency  to  naturalism  and  legalism  is  inherent  in  human 
nature,  and  not  a  necessary  outgrowth  of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal 
grace.  It  threatened,  at  times,  almost  a  total  apostasy  during  the 
Mosaic  economy,  led  the  Jews  to  crucify  Christ,  deluded  even  some 
of  the  converts  of  the  apostles,  leavened  the  Romish  Church,  and 
inoculated  the  Lutheran  in  the  seventeenth,  the  Episcopal  in  the 
eighteenth,  and  the  Congregational  in  the  nineteenth  century;  and 
the  instruments  chosen  of  God  to  reform  them,  through  a  revival  of 
experimental  piety,  were,  in  almost  all  cases  except  that  of  Edwards, 
believers  in  baptismal  grace. 

Two  general  systems  of  religious  effort  for  the  promotion  of  ex- 
perimental piety  have  been  prevalent  in  the  Christian  Church.  The 
one  may  be  called  the  system  of  religious  training,  involving  bap- 
tismal grace,  infant  membership,  and  Christian  nurture  in  the  family, 
the  school  and  the  Church.  While  its  advocates  make  a  faithful  use 
of  the  ordinary  means  of  grace,  they  regard  it  as  not  only  allowable, 
but  also  in  accordance  with  scriptural  precedent,  to  make  special 
efforts  to  lead  the  impenitent  to  Christ,  and  edify  believers,  at  such 
times  as  the  religious  interests  of  the  Church  and  the  indications  of 
Providence  call  for  them.  The  other  system  may  be  called  that  of 
extraordinary    periodical    efforts.       Its    advocates    reject   baptismal 


BAPTISM,  321 

grace,  lay  comparatively  little  stress  on  Christian  nurture,  under- 
value the  ordinary  means  of  grace,  and  rely  mainly  on  special 
periodical  efforts  for  the  conversion  of  children  and  adults.  But  the 
large  proportion  of  self-deceptions  and  spurious  experiences,  together 
with  the  multitude  of  backsliders  and  the  instability  of  the  piety 
promoted  thereby,  have  induced  many  of  its  abettors  to  modify  it, 
by  introducing  some  of  the  features  of  the  training  system  of  God, 
and  thus  guard  against  its  injurious  results.  Tested  by  its  fruits, 
the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace,  when  faithfully  preached 
and  consistently  developed,  will  bear  favorable  comparison  with  the 
modern  SN'stem  of  periodical  efforts,  or  with  any  other  system  of 
doctrine  and  usage  ever  employed  for  the  promotion  of  experimental 
religion  and  the  development  of  true  piety. 

If  the  arguments  by  which  the  Confessors  endeavored  to  prove 
the  doctrine  of  baptismal  grace  be  deemed  inconclusive,  those  who 
reject  it  will  be  constrained  either  to  originate  a  new  or  to  adopt  an 
old  theorj'.  As  they  will  hardly  venture  to  engage  in  invention, 
they  must  content  themselves  with  making  a  selection.  They  are 
not  likely  to  make  choice  of  the  one-sided  spiritualistic  theory  of 
the  Quakers,  who  dispense  with  Baptism  altogether;  nor  that  of  the 
Anabaptists,  who  reject  Infant  Baptism;  nor  that  of  the  Romanists, 
who  invest  it  with  a  magical  influence;  nor  that  of  the  Campbellites, 
who  attribute  its  justifying  and  regenerating  power  to  its  mode 
(immersion);  nor  that  of  the  Calvinists,  who  maintain  that  Bap- 
tism is  applied  to  the  children  of  believing  parents,  as  the  sign  of  a 
regeneration  already  accomplished,  according  to  the  purpose  and 
election  of  God.  This  leaves  them  nothing  but  the  Puritan  theory 
as  the  object  of  their  choice. 

The  modern  Puritan  thcor\'  was  recently  set  forth  in  the  Biblio- 
theca  Sacra  in  these  words:  "In  the  economy  of  grace,  prayer  for 
the  salvation  of  men  puts  them  in  the  way  of  receiving  more 
abundant  ministrations  of  the  Spirit.  Infant  Baptism  is,  on  the  part 
of  parents  and  the  Church,  a  confession,  a  prayer,  a  pledge  and  a 
hope,  embodied  in  one  sacrament.  It  is  a  confession  of  the  universal 
reign  of  sin,  except  where  grace  abounds ;  a  prayer  for  the  regener- 
ating power  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  a  pledge  of  faithfulness  of  Christian 
nurture;  and  a  monument  of  the  hope  that  the  prayer  will  be 
answered,  and  that  through  the  divine  blessing,  the  nurture  will 
accomplish  its  designed  results.     As  being  the  most  objective  and 


32  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

public  expression  of  this  faitii  that  can  be  made  on  the  part  of  the 
parent  and  the  Church,  God  on  his  part  binds  himself,  in  this  act 
more  than  in  any  other,  to  fulfil  his  promise,  and  to  bestow  peculiar 
blessings  on  the  children  thus  consecrated  to  him."  This  theory, 
while  it  still  calls  Baptism  a  sacrament,  really  divests  it  of  its 
sacramental  character,  and  substitutes  prayer  in  its  stead.  Prayer  is 
the  means  of  securing  for  others  the  ministrations  of  the  Spirit. 
According  to  the  Scriptures,  however,  prayer  is  a  privilege,  to  be 
improved  by  the  individual  believer,  to  whom  the  promise  of  the 
Spirit  is  given,  and  which  he  may  offer  constantly,  but  it  is  not  like 
Baptism  a  formal  rite  through  which  God  confers  the  Holy  Spirit 
upon  others.  It  contradicts  itself  It  first  makes  prayer  the  means 
of  conferring  the  Spirit,  but  afterwards  maintains  that  God  through 
Baptism,  in  an  especial  manner,  binds  himself  to  fulfil  his  promise 
and  bestow  peculiar  blessings  upon  baptized  children,  meaning  of 
course  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  confounds  Christian  nurture  and  bap- 
tismal grace.  Prayer  is,  indeed,  offered  in  the  administration  of 
Baptism,  but  it  belongs  to  and  is  an  important  part  of  Christian 
nurture,  and  not  a  substitute  for  Baptism.  Everything  is  made  to 
depend  on  nurture,  and  nothing  upon  grace.  So  that  without 
nurture,  Baptism  does  not  and  will  not  avail  anything  for  the  child. 
But  according  to  the  Scriptures,  Baptism  is  a  means  of  grace,  sup- 
plying the  conditions  upon  which  the  possibility  and  success  of 
Christian  nurture  depend.  While  this  theory  formally  initiates  the 
children  into  the  Church,  it  really  leaves  them  in  the  world;  and 
hence  it  is  declared  that  "  it  leads  to  a  confusion  of  thought,  and  a 
perversion  of  the  rite  (Baptism),  to  call  baptized  children  church 
members,  until  they  give  some  positive  sign  of  regeneration,  and 
make  a  public  profession  of  Christ." 

This  theory  not  only  ignores  the  initiatory  character  of  Infant 
Baptism,  but  by  denying  that  it  is  a  means  of  grace,  it  involves  an 
erroneous  theory  of  Christian  nurture,  and  leads  to  the  most  lamen- 
table results.  Dr.  Bushnell  describes  it  in  his  work  on  "  Christian 
Nurture"  as  follows:  "It  is  the  prevalence  of  false  views  on  this 
subject  (Christian  nurture)  which  creates  so  great  difficulty  in  sus- 
taining Infant  Baptism  in  our  churches.  If  children  are  to  grow  up 
in  sin,  to  be  converted  when  they  come  to  the  age  of  maturity,  if 
this  is  the  only  aim  and  expectation  of  family  nurture,  there  really 
is  no  meaning  or  dignity  whatever  in  the  rite  (Baptism).     They  are 


BAPTISM. 


d^:y 


even  baptized  into  sin,  and  every  propriety  of  the  rite  as  a  seal  of 
faith  is  violated.  The  aim,  effort  and  expectation  should  be,  not  as 
is  commonly  assumed,  that  the  child  is  to  grow  up  in  sin,  to  be 
converted  after  he  comes  to  a  mature  age;  but  that  he  is  to  open  on 
the  world  as  one  that  is  spiritually  renewed,  not  remembering  the 
time  when  he  went  through  a  technical  experience,  but  seeming 
rather  to  have  loved  what  is  good  from  his  earliest  years.  *  *  It 
would  certainly  be  very  singular,  if  Christ  Jesus  in  a  scheme  of 
mercy  for  the  world  had  found  no  place  for  infants  and  little  chil- 
dren— more  singular  still,  if  he  had  given  them  the  place  of  adults — 
and  worse  than  singular,  if  he  had  appointed  them  to  years  of  sin 
as  the  necessary  preparation  for  his  mercy." 

"And  why  should  it  be  thought  incredible,  that  there  should  be 
some  really  good  principle  awakened  in  the  mind  of  a  child?  For 
this  is  all  that  is  implied  in  a  Christian  state.  The  Christian  is  one 
who  has  simply  begun  to  love  what  is  good  for  its  own  sake;  and 
wh)^  should  it  be  thought  impossible  tor  a  child  to  have  this  love 
begotten  in  him  ?  Take  any  scheme  of  depravity  you  please,  there 
is  yet  nothing  in  it  to  forbid  the  possibility  that  a  child  should  be 
led,  in  his  first  moral  act,  to  cleave  unto  what  is  good  and  right,  any 
more  than  in  the  first  of  his  twentieth  year.  He  is  in  that  case  only 
a  child  converted  to  good,  leading  a  mixed  life,  as  all  Christians  do. 
The  good  in  him  goes  into  combat  with  the  evil,  and  holds  a  quali- 
fied sovereignty.  And  why  may  not  this  internal  conflict  of  good- 
ness cover  the  whole  life  from  its  dawn,  as  well  as  any  part  of  it  ? 
And  what  more  appropriate  to  the  doctrine  of  spiritual  influence 
itself,  than  to  believe  that,  as  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  fills  all  the  worlds 
of  matter,  and  holds  a  presence  of  power  and  government  in  all  its 
objects,  so  all  human  souls,  the  infantile  as  well  as  the  adult,  have 
a  mixture  of  the  Spirit,  appropriate  to  their  age  and  their  wants? 
What  opinion  is  more  esssntially  monstrous,  in  fact,  than  that  which 
regards  the  Holy  Spirit  as  having  no  agency  in  the  immature  souls 
of  children,  who  are  growing  up  helpless  and  unconscious,  into  the 
perils  of  time?" 

While  Dr.  Bushnell  rejects  the  Romish  error  of  Baptismal  Re- 
generation, he  declares  that  the  Puritan  theory  and  practice  con- 
cerning Infant  Baptism  involve  an  error  scarcely  less  injurious. 
He  does  not,  indeed,  introduce  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  baptismal 
grace,  but  that  very  grace  for  which  he  pleads,  and  through  the 


324  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

influence  of  which  children  may  be  trained  to  grow  up  Christians, 
is  precisely  the  grace  which  the  Confessors  taught  that  Infant  Bap- 
tism offers  and  secures. 

When  the  Puritan  and  the  Lutheran  theories  of  Infant  Baptism 
are  tested  by  the  Scriptures,  the  contrast  between  them  becomes 
still  more  striking.  Admit  that  through  Baptism  God  confers  the 
Holy  Spirit  upon  children,  and  every  passage  pertaining  to  the 
subject  can  be  readily  explained,  according  to  the  true  laws  of  in- 
terpretation. Deny  this,  and  transform  Baptism  into  a  naked  sign 
of  grace  and  parental  pledge  of  Christian  nurture,  and  the  baptismal 
passages  cannot  be  made  to  accord  with  such  a  theory,  without 
doing  violence  to  the  rules  of  sound  exegesis.  Children,  offered  to 
God  in  the  name  of  Christ,  are  said  to  receive  the  kingdom  of  God^ 
but  they  are,  nevertheless,  left  without  grace,  to  choose  the  kingdom 
of  Satan — they  are  recognized  as  members  of  the  Church,  which  is 
made  up  of  the  saved,  but  they  belong  to  the  world,  which  embraces 
the  lost — they  are  baptized  into  the  communion  of  the  Father,  Son 
and  Holy  Ghost,  but,  with  original  sin  untouched  by  grace,  they 
remain  in  fellowship  with  the  devil  and  his  angels. 

We  conclude  our  lecture  with  the  following  summary  of  the 
Lutheran  doctrine  of  Baptism  as  set  forth  by  the  Confessors.  Bap- 
tism is  a  religious  ordinance,  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ.  Its  con- 
stituent elements  are  water  and  the  word  of  God.  Its  administra- 
tion consists  in  the  application  of  water  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
Son  and  Holy  Ghost,  by  an  authorized  minister  of  the  gospel,  either 
by  sprinkling,  pouring  or  immersion.  Its  subjects  are  adult  be- 
lievers and  their  children.  Its  validity  is  based  upon  its  divine 
institution  and  observance  according  to  the  command  of  God,  and 
not  upon  either  the  character  of  the  administrator,  the  mode  of  ap- 
plying the  water,  or  the  faith  of  the  recipient.  It  is  a  sacrament  or 
''visible  word,"  an  efficacious  sign  and  seal  of  the  promise  of  God, 
a  sure  testimony  of  his  will  toward  us,  which  becomes  efficacious, 
not  ex  opere  operato,  but  through  faith,  apprehending  the  truths 
signified,  and  relying  upon  the  promise  made  by  it.  It  is  a  means 
of  grace,  through  which  God  offers  his  grace  and  confers  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  excites  and  confirms  faith  in  those  who  use  it  aright, 
whereby  they  obtain  the  remission  of  sins,  are  born  again,  released 
from  condemnation  and  eternal  death,  and  are  received  and  remain 
in  God's  favor,  so  long  as  they  continue  in  a  state  of  faith  and  bring 


BAPTISM.  325 

forth  good  works;  but  to  them  who  are  destitute  of  faith  it  remains 
a  fruitless  sign  and  imparts  no  blessing,  while  those  who  misim- 
prove  their  Baptism  by  a  course  of  wilful  sin  and  wicked  works, 
receive  the  grace  of  God  in  vain,  grieve  and  lose  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  fall  into  a  state  of  condemnation,  from  which  they  cannot  be 
recovered  except  by  a  true  conversion,  involving  a  renewal  of  the 
understanding,  will  and  heart.  Baptism  ought  also  to  be  adminis- 
tered to  children,  who,  through  such  Baptism,  are  offered  to  God, 
become  acceptable  to  him,  and  are  received  into  his  favor.  It  im- 
poses the  duty  of  Christian  nurture  upon  parents  and  the  Church, 
and  finds  its  complement  in  Confirmation.  It  is  ordinarily  neces- 
sary, as  a  divinely  appointed  ordinance,  but  not  absolutely  essential 
to  salvation. 
22 


ARTICLE  X. 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 

BY  G.  DIEHL,  D.  D. 


THE  rule  established  by  those  who  have  preceded  me  on  the 
Holman  foundation  of  Augsburg  Confession  lectures,  of  taking 
the  Articles  of  the  Confession  in  the  order  in  which  they  stand,  pre- 
sents to  us  the  Tenth  Article  for  our  subject  this  evening.  It  is 
understood,  I  believe,  that  these  lectures  are  expected  to  be  a  true 
and  faithful  development  of  the  doctrines  taught  in  the  Confessional 
writings  of  the  Church. 

"  Of  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  they  teach  that  the  (true)  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  truly  present  (under  the  form  of  bread  and  wine),  and  are  (there) 
communicated  to  those  that  eat  in  the  Lord's  Supper  (and  received),  and  they 
disapprove  those  who  teach  otherwise  (wherefore  also  the  opposite  doctrine  is 

rejected)." 

This  Article  treats  of  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  so 
called  because  instituted  at  supper  time  (i  Cor.  xi.  20).  It  is  also 
called  "  the  Lord's  table  "  and  "  the  cup  of  the  Lord."  (i  Cor.  x.  2 1.) 
Other  terms  have  been  applied,  such  as  "  Communion,"  a  festival  in 
common,  taken  probably  from  i  Corinthians  x.  16;  "  Eucharist,"  a 
giving  of  thanks,  because  hymns  and  psalms  were-  sung.  By  the 
Greeks  it  was  called  "  Mysterion,"  sacrament ;  by  the  Latins 
"  Missa  "  (Mass),  and  by  the  Reformers  "  The  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar." 

The  New  Testament  Account. 

The  institution  of  this  sacrament  is  recorded  by  Matt,  xxvi.  26-29; 
Mk.  xiv.  22-25  ;  Lk.  xxii.  19-20;  and  the  apostle  Paul  (i  Cor.  xi. 

326 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER. 


:>-/ 


22-26).  Paul's  account  differs  very  little  from  that  of  his  com- 
panion, Luke. 

Matthew's  statement  is  this:  "  Now  when  the  even  was  come,  he 
sat  down  with  the  twelve"  (to  eat  the  Passover  which  had  been  pre- 
pared by  his  direction),  "and  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus  took  bread, 
and  blessed  it,  and  brake  it,  and  gave  it  to  the  disciples,  and  said, 
Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body.  And  he  took  the  cup,  and  gave  thanks, 
and  gave  it  to  them,  saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  it;  for  this  is  my  blood 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of 
sins." 

That  it  was  instituted  in  remembrance  of  Christ  is  recorded  by 
Luke  and  Paul.  John  does  not  mention  the  institution  of  the  holy 
sacrament,  but  he  records  minutely  a  discourse  of  the  Saviour  (John 
vi.  51-59,)  which,  in  the  opinion  of  some  interpreters,  has  some  ref- 
erence to  one  feature  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Paul  warns  the  Corinthians  that  they  cannot  partake  of  the  Lord's 
table  and  at  the  same  time  eat  of  pagan  sacrifices  (i  Cor.  x.  16-21), 
because  "the  things  which  the  Gentiles  sacrifice,  they  sacrifice  to 
devils  and  not  to  God."  And  in  another  part  of  the  Epistle  (xi.  27, 
29),  he  tells  them  that  "  whosoever  shall  eat  this  bread  and  drink 
this  cup  of  the  Lord  unworthily,  shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord,"  and  "  eateth  and  drinketh  damnation  to  himself, 
not  discerning  the  Lord's  body." 

The  Doctrine  Taught. 

What  is  the  doctrine  taught  in  this  Tenth  Article  ? 

It  is  simply  this  :  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
present  in  the  holy  supper,  and  communicated  to  those  who  eat  and 
drink  therein. 

There  can  be  no  misapprehension  with  regard  to  the  view  set 
forth  in  this  brief  Article,  for  the  authors  of  the  Confession  have,  in 
other  writings,  clearly  and  fully  expressed  their  sentiments  on  the 
subject. 

A  General  Statement  of  the  Doctrine. 

The  Article,  then,  teaches  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
are  present  in  a  supernatural  way,  under  the  forms  of  bread  and 
wine,  and  arc  received  by  the  communicant.  By  the  true  body  is 
to  be  understood,  not  the  material  body  and  blood ; — not  the  earthly, 


328  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

or  gross  or  carnal  body; — not  such  material  flesh  and  blood  as 
ours; — not  the  material  body  and  blood  in  the  form  and  state  in 
which  Jesus  wore  his  body  on  the  earth  before  his  crucifixion  ;  but 
that  which  constitutes  his  body  and  blood  since  his  descent  into 
hell,  his  resurrection,  and  ascension  to  heaven, — his  glorified  human 
nature, — that  body  and  blood  which  is  spiritual  and  celestial. 

This  stands  in  opposition  and  contrast  to  the  Romish  theory  of 
Transubstantiation,  that  the  consecration  of  the  elements  by  the 
priest  changes  them  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  This  is 
rejected  on  the  ground  of  reason  and  scripture.  No  change  in 
the  properties  of  the  elements  can  be  detected  by  the  senses  or  by 
chemical  analysis.  And  Paul  calls  it  after  consecration,  "The  bread 
which  we  break." 

This  doctrine  is  also  opposed  to  the  Zwinglian  theory,  which 
makes  the  Eucharist  merely  commemorative,  and  the  presence  of 
Christ  merely  spiritual. 

It  is  also  opposed  to  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  which,  admitting 
that  the  believing  communicant  eats  and  drinks  the  true  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  yet  contends  that  the  participation  is  by  faith  of  the 
body  of  Christ  in  heaven,  the  local  presence  being  only  at  the  right 
hand  of  God. 

Distinct  from  all  and  each  of  these  views,  the  Tenth  Article  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  teaches  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
are  in  the  sacrament,  and  communicated  to  those  who  eat  and  drink 
in  the  holy  supper,  whether  they  have  penitence  and  faith,  or  are 
unbelieving  and  wicked — whether  worthy  or  unworthy — the  efficacy 
of  the  sacramental  presence  being  objective,  and  not  depending  on 
the  spiritual  state  of  the  communicant;  keeping  in  view  always  that 
the  heavenly  or  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  impart  to  the  believ- 
ing or  worthy  communicant  spiritual  life  and  salvation,  while  to  the 
unbeliever  or  unworthy  communicant  they  impart  judgment  and 
condemnation. 

How  can  we  reconcile  the  apparently  conflicting  statements  of  the 
absence  of  all  material  flesh  and  blood  and  yet  the  presence  of  the 
true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ?  To  comprehend  this  doctrine,  sev- 
eral truths  must  be  always  viewed  in  connection  with  this  subject. 

It  is  held  that  in  the  incarnation  of  our  Saviour  the  human  and 
the  divine  natures  were  inseparably  united.  We  can  have  no  con- 
ception of  a  Saviour  except  as  a  divine-human  being, — "  God  mani- 


THE    LORDS    SUPPER.  329 

fest  in  the  flesli," — "  the  Word  made  flesh," — not  for  a  Hmited  time, 
but  for  all  tin;e.  This  union  of  the  two  natures  is  perpetual  and 
inseparable. 

Again,  we  can  have  no  conception  of  humanity  separate  from 
flesh  and  blood.  Christ  was  crucified  and  buried.  After  his  burial 
he  descended  into  hell;  then  rose  from  the  dead;  then  ascended  into 
heaven.  In  these  three  acts,  or  stages  of  exaltation, — in  one  or  in 
all  of  them  (descent,  resurrection  and  ascension) — his  body  under- 
went a  change  similar  to  that  which  ours  shall  undergo  in  the  final 
resurrection,  when  Christ  "shall  change  our  vile  body  that  it  may 
be  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body"  (Phil.  iii.  21).  And  as 
our  bodies  shall  be  raised  "  in  incorruption," — "  in  glory," — "  in 
power," — raised  "a  spiritual  body"  (i  Cor.  xv.  42-44),  Christ's 
body,  since  the  ascension,  must  be  a  spiritual  and  glorified  body. 
His  humanity  is  a  glorified  humanity.  His  true  body  and  blood 
appertain  to  his  glorified  state. 

By  virtue  of  the  perpetual  and  inseparable  union  of  the  divine  and 
human  natures  in  one  person — the  divine-human  Saviour — the  God- 
man — wherever  Christ  appears  to  his  people,  he  appears  not  as  God 
only,  but  as  the  God- man — the  divine-human  Saviour.  So  that  the 
body  of  Christ,  which  has  one  mode  of  local  presence  at  the  right 
hand  of  God  in  heaven,  has  also  another  mode  of  presence  elsewhere. 

Also,  by  virtue  of  the  inseparable  union  of  the  divine  and  the 
human,  the  body  of  Christ  has  other  properties  than  those  which 
will  appertain  to  07ir  glorified  humanity. 

Now  the  Saviour's  promise,  "where  two  or  three  are  gathered 
together  in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them"  (Mt.  xviii. 
20),  and  the  other  promise,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world"  (Mt.  xxviii.  20),  imply  the  presence  of  his 
humanity  as  well  as  of  his  divinity,  for  the  two  natures  are  insepar- 
able in  his  one  person.  The  promise  of  the  presence  of  the  Saviour 
in  all  Christian  assemblies  met  in  his  name,  is  the  promise  of  the 
presence  not  merely  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  third  person  of  the 
Trinity;  nor  the  presence  merely  of  God  the  second  person  of  the 
Trinity  as  separate  from  humanity;  because  in  the  Saviour  there  can 
be  no  such  separation  of  the  two  natures.  The  presence  of  God  out 
of  Christ  could  be  no  comfort  to  sinful  beings.  God  becomes  to  us 
a  reconciled  Father,  a  friendly  God,  only  through  Christ,  the  divine- 
human  Saviour.     All  the  consoling  promises  and  assurances  of  the 


330  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Gospel  rest  on  the  idea  and  truth  of  these  two  natures  of  our  Re- 
deemer in  inseparable  union.  If  the  idea  of  human'cy  essential  to 
his  being  a  Saviour,  could  be  separated  from  Christ,  the  second  per- 
son in  the  Trinity  would  become  merely  God  infinitely  holy  and 
just,  and  as  such,  a  terror  to  all  the  human  family  in  a  sinful  state. 

But  the  Redeemer  comes  to  his  people  as  the  God-man,  with  all 
the  sympathies  of  his  humanity,  as  well  as  with  all  the  power  and 
glory  of  his  divinity.  Now  as  his  humanity  is  not  palpable  to  our 
senses,  though  really  present  where  Christians  have  assembled  in 
his  name,  so  in  the  Holy  Supper,  his  body,  though  really  present, 
is  not  in  the  material  form  in  which  he  appeared  in  the  days  of  his 
flesh. 

The  Scripture  argument  in  favor  of  this  doctrine  rests  chiefly  on 
two  passages,  viz.,  "This  is  my  body,"  "this  is  my  blood"  (Mt.  xxvi. 
26),  and  "  The  cup  of  blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  com- 
munion of  the  blood  of  Christ?  The  bread  which  we  break,  is  it 
not  the  communion  of  the  body  o*f  Christ?"  (i  Cor.  x.  16.)  It  is 
held  by  the  authors  of  the  Confession,  that  these  words  occurring 
in  the  institution  of  a  sacrament  must  be  taken  in  a  literal  and  not 
in  a  figurative  sense. 

The  Doctrine  Stated  in  the  Language  of  the  Confessions. 

A  few  passages  from  the  Confessions  will  show  the  correctness 
of  the  above  statement. 

Luther'' s  Small  Catechism :  "  The  sacrament  of  the  altar  is  the 
true  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  under  the  bread  and  wine  given 
unto  us  Christians  to  eat  and  to  drink  as  it  was  instituted  by  Christ 
himself" 

Luther's  Large  CatecJiism:  "  Here  we  shall  learn  first  on  what  the 
power  and  virtue  of  this  sacrament  depend;  namely,  that  the  princi- 
pal thing  is  the  word  and  order  or  command  of  God;  for  it  was 
neither  devised  nor  invented  by  any  man,  but  it  was  instituted  by 
Christ  himself,  without  the  counsel  or  deliberation  of  any  man. 

What  then  is  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  ?  It  is  the  true  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  our  Lord  in  and  with  bread  and  wine,  comprehended 
through  the  words  of  Christ,  for  us  Christians  to  eat  and  to  drink. 
This  sacrament  is  bread  and  wine,  but  not  mere  bread  and  wine, 
such  as  is  taken  to  the  table  on  other  occasions  ;  but  bread  and  wine 
comprehended  in  the  word  of  God  and  connected  with  it.     It  is  the 


THE    LORDS    SUPPER.  33 1 

word  that  makes  and  distinguishes  this  sacrament,  so  that  it  is  not 
mere  bread  and  wine,  but  is  and  is  called  the  body  of  Christ." 

Apology :  "The  sacrament  was  instituted  by  Christ  to  console  the 
consciences  of  alarmed  persons,  and  to  strengthen  their  faith  when 
they  believe  that  the  flesh  of  Christ  was  given  for  the  life  of  the 
world,  and  that  through  this  nourishment  we  become  united  with 
Christ  and  have  grace  and  life." 

Snialcald  Articles:  "Concerning  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  we 
hold  that  with  bread  and  wine  in  the  Eucharist  are  the 
true  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  are  administered  and  received 
not  only  by  pious-  persons,  but  also  by  those  who  are  not  pious." 

Form  of  Concord  [Epitome):  "  We  believe  that  in  the  holy  sacra- 
ment of  the  Lord's  Supper  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  really 
and  essentially  present  and  with  bread  and  wine  really  administered 
and  received.  Bread  and  wine  do  not  signify  the  absent  body  of 
Christ,  but  through  the  agency  of  the  sacramental  union  they  are 
truly  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ." 

The  Lutheran  View  Distinct  from  Others. 

The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  real  presence,  clearly  stated  in  these 
passages  from  the  Confessions,  is  brought  out  in  stronger  and 
sharper  outlines  by  defining  the  difference  between  the  Lutheran 
and  other  theories  on  the  subject.  Notice  how  boldly  it  stands  out 
in  opposition  to  the  Romish  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  which 
is  strongly  condemned  and  rejected  in  the  Confessions. 

Transubstantiation  Rejected. 

Form  of  Concord  (Epitome^:  "We  unanimously  reject  and  con- 
demn the  papistical  transubstantiation,  where  it  is  taught  that  bread 
and  wine  in  the  holy  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  lose  their 
substance  and  natural  essence,  and  thus  become  annihilated;  that 
is,  that  they  are  transmuted  into  the  body  of  Christ,  and  that  the 
external  form  alone  remains." 

Form  of  Concord,  [Declaration):  "We  reject  and  condemn  as 
false  and  dangerous  the  error  of  papistical  transubstantiation,  by 
which  is  taught  that  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  in  the  holy 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  lose  their  substance  and  essence 
wholly  and  entirely,  and  are  changed  into  the  substance  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ;  so  that  only  the  mere  form  of  bread  and  wine 


332  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

(accidentia  sine  subjecto)  remains.  And  as  they  think,  under  the 
form  of  bread,  which  however  according  to  their  opinion  is  no  longer 
bread  but  has  lost  its  natural  essence,  the  body  of  Christ  is  present, 
even  apart  from  the  administration  of  the  Supper,  when  the  bread 
is  enclosed  in  the  pyx,  or  carried  about  as  a  spectacle  to  be  adored. 
For  nothing  can  be  a  sacrament  apart  from  the  command  of  God 
and  the  ordained  use  for  which  it  was  instituted  by  the  word  of 
God." 

Romish  View  Rejected  on  Two  Grounds. 

The  Romish  view  here  so  strongly  condemned  is  rejected  on  two 
grounds.  That  the  consecration  by  the  priest  effects  no  change  in 
the  elements  is  evident.  Tested  by  the  senses — by  sight,  taste  and 
touch — there  is  no  change  in  their  color,  form  or  qualities.  Tested 
by  chemical  analysis,  all  the  properties  of  bread  and  wine  remain 
after  as  before  consecration.  The  Romish  error  is  therefore  con- 
demned by  common  sense  and  reason.  In  the  mysteries  of  the 
Christian  religion  we  are  never  required  to  reject  or  discredit  the 
testimony  of  our  senses  zvith  regard  to  the  properties  of  material 
substances.     The  Romish  theory  is  therefore  utterly  untenable. 

It  is  also  condemned  by  the  inspired  word  of  God.  St.  Paul  asks 
(i  Cor.  X.  16),  "The  bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion 
of  the  body  of  Christ?"  The  breaking  of  the  bread  is  after  the 
consecration.  Paul  calls  it  bread  at  the  time  of  breaking.  If  the 
Romish  theory  were  true,  Paul  would  have  said,  "  is  not  the  body 
which  we  break  ?  "  But  instead  of  that,  he  says,  "  is  not  tJie  bread 
which  we  break?"     He  clearly  calls  it  bread,  after  consecration. 

This  shows  how  little  the  doctrine  of  the  Lutheran  standards  is 
understood  by  those  who  have  said  that  these  standards  teach  a 
doctrine  nearly  akin  to  that  of  the  Papists. 

Distinct  from  Zwinglian  and  Calvinistic  Views. 

The  doctrine  set  forth  in  the  Tenth  Article  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  and  developed  in  the  Catechisms  and  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord, stands  out  in  bold  distinction  from  the  Zwinglian  and  Calvin- 
istic views.  The  standards  group  these  views  together  and  call 
their  advocates  "  sacramentarians." 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  333 

Repudiation  of  Zwinglian  and  Calvinistic  Opinions. 

Form  of  Co?tcord:  "  We  reject  and  condemn  with  our  hearts 
and  h'ps,  as  false  and  erroneous,  these  opinions  and  dogmas  of  the 
sacramentarians,  namely: 

"  I.  That  the  words  of  the  institution  are  not  to  be  received  simply 
in  their  literal  meaning  as  they  read,  concerning  the  true  essential 
presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  but 
through  tropical  and  figurative  significations  they  are  to  be  ex- 
plained in  a  different  sense.  And  here  we  reject  all  similar  opinions 
of  the  sacramentarians,  and  their  self-contradictory  definitions,  no 
matter  how  multifarious  and  diverse  they  may  be. 

■*  2.  Again  we  reject  the  doctrines  by  which  the  oral  participation 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Holy  Supper  is  denied  and 
by  which  on  the  contrary  it  is  taught  that  in  this  supper  the  body 
of  Christ  is  received  Dnly  spiritually  by  faith ;  so  that  in  this  holy 
supper  we  receive  with  our  lips  nothing  but  mere  bread  and  wine. 

"  3.  In  like  manner  we  reject  the  doctrine  that  bread  and  wine  in 
the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  are  nothing  more  than  signs  or 
badges,  (Kennzeichen,)  by  which  Christians  may  be  known  to  each 
other. 

"4.  Also  that  they  are  only  indications,  similitudes  and  represent- 
ations of  the  far-absent  body  of  Christ,  in  such  a  manner  that  even  as 
bread  and  wine  are  the  external  food  of  our  bodies,  so  the  absent 
body  of  Christ,  with  his  merits,  is  the  spiritual  food  of  our  souls. 

"  5.  That  they  are  nothing  more  than  signs  and  memorials  of  the 
absent  body  of  Christ,  through  which,  as  through  an  external  pledge, 
we  are  assured  that  faith  which  turns  itself  away  from  the  Lord's 
Supper  and  ascends  above  all  heavens,  there  indeed  becomes  a  par- 
ticipant of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as  truly  as  we  receive  the 
external  signs  with  our  lips. 

"6.  That  in  the  Holy  Supper  only  the  virtue,  operation  and  merit 
of  the  far-absent  body  of  Christ  are  administered  unto  faith,  so  that 
in  this  manner  we  become  partakers  of  his  absent  body,  and  sacra- 
mental union  is  to  be  understood  in  the  manner  stated,  that  is,  fi-om 
the  analogy  of  a  sign  and  the  thing  signified. 

"  7.«That  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  received  only  spiritu- 
ally through  faith. 

"  8.  That  Christ  is  so  contained  and  circumscribed  with  his  body  in 
a  certain  place  in  heaven,  that  with  it  he  neither  can  nor  will  be 


334  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

truly  and  essentially  present  with  us  in  the  holy  supper  which  is  cel- 
ebrated here  on  earth  according  to  the  institution  of  Christ,  but  that 
he  is  far  distant  from  it  as  heaven  and  earth  are  from  each  other. 

"  9.  That  Christ  neither  could  nor  would  promise  or  effect  the  true 
essential  presence  of  his  body  and  blood  in  the  holy  supper,  since 
the  nature  and  properties  of  his  assumed  human  nature  can  neither 
bear  nor  admit  of  it. " 

These  declarations  are  sufficient  to  show  how  completely  every 
phase  of  distinctively  Zwinglian  and  Calvinistic  doctrine  is  rejected. 
Calvin  held  many  tenets  in  common  with  Luther  on  the  Lord's 
Supper.  But  everything  distinctly  Calvinistic — Calvinistic  in  op- 
position to  Lutheran — was  abhorrent  to  the  theologians  of  the  Form 
of  Concord.  Hence  they  repudiate  as  false  and  dangerous  such 
dogmas  as  that  the  words  of  Christ  in  the  institution  can  be  taken 
in  a  figurative  sense.  This  would  divest  the  sacrament,  they  held,  of 
its  essence.  The  words  can  be  taken  only  in  one  sense,  that  is,  the 
literal  meaning.  Starting  out  with  this  principle,  they  repudiated 
with  strong  feelings  of  aversion  the  error  that  the  sacrament  is 
merely  commemorative ;  or  that  the  bread  and  wine  were  only  indi- 
cations, similitudes  and  signs  of  the  absent  body  of  Christ ;  or  that 
they  were  mere  badges  of  recognition  ;  or  that  Christ's  presence  was 
merely  spiritual,  whether  in  the  sense  of  imparting  the  influences  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  or  of  a  purely  spiritual  presence  of  Christ,  the  second 
person  in  the  Trinity,  as  separate  from  humanity  (which  would  in- 
volve the  overthrow  of  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  and 
that  of  the  person  of  Christ) ;  or  that  the  one  nature  of  Christ,  the 
God- man,  can  have  only  a  local  presence  in  heaven;  or  that  the  be- 
liever in  order  to  feed  on  Christ  must  ascend  by  faith  into  heaven 
and  there  partake  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ;  or  that  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  can  be  understood  only  in  the  sense  of  the  vir- 
tue, power  and  efficacy  of  the  atonement ;  or  that  the  efficiency  of 
Christ's  word  and  power  should  be  so  circumscribed  and  limited 
that  he  could  not  by  his  word  and  almighty  power  cause  such  a 
presence  of  his  body  and  blood  as  his  solemn  language  in  the  insti- 
tution implies;  or  that  the  faith  of  the  communicant  should  have 
more  power  than  the  word  of  Christ,  as  in  the  Calvinistic  theq^y ;  or 
that  the  presence  of  Christ  should  be  dependent  on  the  spiritual 
state  of  the  communicant,  thus  putting  the  whole  sacramental  effi- 
cacy at  the  mercy  of  man,  instead  of  the  power  and  word  of  Christ. 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  335 

In  Lutheran  theology  tlie  Lord's  Supper  is  regarded  as  a  fun- 
damental matter  in  the  Christian  system.  It  embodies  the  great 
central  truths  of  Christianity.  Being  the  last  institution  of  the 
Redeemer,  the  last  doctrine,  the  last  command,  on  the  eve  of  the 
great  atoning  sacrifice,  there  is  concentrated  into  it,  as  the  climax 
of  his  teaching  and  ordinances,  the  essence  of  the  whole  Christian 
system.  This  sacrament  strikes  its  roots  down  into  the  Old  Testa- 
ment dispensation.  As  the  earliest  promises  and  predictions  made 
to  patriarchs  and  prophets  pointed  to  Christ,  and  every  sacrifice  in 
their  ceremonial  worship  ordained  at  Sinai  pointed  to  him  ;  as  every 
high  priest  was  a  type  and  every  deliverer  of  Israel  a  figure  of 
Christ;  as  he  was  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses;  the  King  of  David's 
house,  David's  Lord  as  well  as  Son ; — the  righteous  branch  men- 
tioned by  Jeremiah  ;  the  Good  Shepherd  foreseen  by  Ezekiel,  and 
the  Messenger  of  the  Covenant  promised  by  Malachi,  so  he  was 
also  the  Paschal  Lamb  whose  blood  shields  from  the  destroyer. 

The  Passover  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  was  the  most  striking 
type  of  this  sacrament.  It  was  an  ordinance  of  God,  instituted  by 
the  divine  command,  connected  with  the  manifestation  of  God's 
power  in  the  deliverance  of  his  people.  It  was  a  transaction 
between  God  and  the  people.  The  salvation  promised  depended 
on  the  strict  observance  by  the  people  of  their  part  of  the  transac- 
tion. "  They  shall  take  them  every  man  a  lamb,"  (Ex.  xii.  3.) 
The  lamb  unblemished  was  slain.  The  blood  was  sprinkled  upon 
the  lintels  and  door-posts  of  the  houses.  The  flesh  of  the  lamb  was 
eaten.  Thus  the  covenant  was  kept,  and  the  angel  passed  by  the 
sprinkled  houses.  ^ 

Christ  is  our  Passover.  He  is  frequently  called  a  lamb  :  a  lamb 
unblemished.  Isaiah  tells  us,  "  the  Man  of  Sorrows  was  led  as  a 
lamb  to  the  slaughter"  (liii.  3,  7).  John  says,  "  Behold  the  Lamb 
of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world  "  (i.  29).  Peter  says 
(i,  i.  19),  "  The  blood  of  Christ  as  of  a  lamb."  St.  John  (Rev.  v.  12), 
*'  Worthy  is  the  Lamb  that  was  slain." 

As  the  paschal  lamb  was  typically  unblemished,  so  Christ  our 
Passover  was  really  perfect:  "  holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  made  sep- 
arate from  sinners."  "  Ye  were  redeemed  with  the  precious  blood 
of  Christ  as  of  a  lamb  without  blemish  and  without  .spot"  (i  Pet.  i. 
19).  Like  the  paschal  lamb,  Christ  also  was  slain,  "The  whole 
assembly  shall  kill  it "  (Ex.  xii.  6).     Of  Christ  it  is  said,  "  They  killed 


336  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  Lord  Jesus"  (i  Thes,  ii.  15).  "In  the  midst  of  the  throne  stood 
the  Lamb  as  it  had  been  slain  "  (Rev.  v.  6).  "  Thou  wast  slain  and 
hast  redeemed  us  to  God  by  thy  blood  "  (Rev.  v.  9.) 

As  the  Passover  was  a  typical  sacrifice  (Ex.  xii.  27),  so  Christ 
gave  himself  a  sacrifice  for  us,  "  When  he  said,  sacrifice  and  offering 
and  burnt  offering  and  offering  for  sin  thou  wouldst  not,  then  said 
he,  Lo !  I  come  to  do  thy  will,  O  God  ;  he  taketh  away  the  first  that 
he  may  establish  the  second,  by  which  we  are  sanctified  through  the 
offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ,  once  for  all."  (Heb.  x.  8- 10. 
Quoting  Ps.  xl.  6-8.)  "  How  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ, 
who  through  the  eternal  Spirit  offered  himself  without  spot  to  God, 
purge  your  consciences  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God?" 
(Heb.  ix.  14.) 

To  the  completion  of  the  paschal  ordinance  and  covenant  it  was 
necessary  that  the  lamb  should  be  eaten.  "  They  shall  eat  the  flesh 
in  the  night"  (Ex.  xii.  8).  If  an  Israelite  had  merely  killed  the 
lamb  and  sprinkled  the  blood  on  the  door-frame  of  the  house,  but 
refused  to  eat  the  flesh,  would  the  ordinance  have  been  fully  ob- 
served ?  Would  the  transaction  have  been  complete?  Would  the 
covenant  have  been  kept?  Would  the  angel  of  death  have  passed 
by  the  house  of  the  man  who  presumed  to  transgress  in  one  essen- 
tial part?  By  no  means.  Man  has  no  right  or  authority  to  add  to, 
or  take  from,  God's  word  and  ordinance.  So  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
there  is  a  natural  eating  of  the  bread,  and  a  supernatural  eating  of 
the  body  of  Christ.  '*  The  bread  that  I  give  is  my  flesh  which  I 
give  for  the  life  of  the  world.  Except  ye  shall  eat  the  flesh  of  the 
Son  of  man,  ye  have  |io  life  in  you.  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh  hath 
eternal  life.  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  dwelleth  in  me.  My  flesh  is 
meat  indeed"  (John  vi.  51-58.)  In  the  passover  the  people  were 
commanded  to  eat  the  flesh  of  the  lamb  in  a  natural  way.  In  the 
New  Testament  Church  the  people  of  Christ  are  to  eat  in  a  super- 
natural way  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man — not  the  material,  not  the 
carnal,  or  gross,  or  terrene,  but  the  celestial,  the  spiritual  body — to 
eat  not  in  a  natural  way,  but  in  a  supernatural. 

The  argument  employed  by  the  theologians  of  the  Reformation 
in  support  of  this  literal  construction  of  the  language  of  Christ  in 
the  institution  of  the  Eucharist  is :  First,  It  is  the  natural,  proper, 
original  signification  of  the  word  is.  Secondly,  Even  if  there  are 
some  instances  in  classic  and  sacred   Greek  in  which  the  word   is 


I 


THE    LORDS    SUPPEK.  2>37 

taken  in  the  sense  of  signifying,  it  cannot  be  so  understood  in  this 
connection.  In  the  institution  of  the  sacraments,  they  say,  Christ 
employed  language  only  in  its  literal,  and  not  in  a  figurative  sense. 
It  is  therefore  doing  violence  to  all  fair  construction,  to  take  the 
words  of  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Supper  in  a  tropical  sense. 
This  is  the  more  apparent  when  we  bear  in  mind  that  in  the  lan- 
guage spoken  by  Christ  at  the  time  there  are  more  than  thirty 
words  to  express  the  idea  of  signifying.  If,  therefore,  Christ  had 
intended  to  declare,  "  this  signifies  my  body,"  it  is  inconceivable 
that  he  should  not  have  selected  a  word  about  which  there  could  be 
no  question,  and  which  could  not  possibly  mislead  any  one.  Tropes 
and  figures  of  speech  would  be  incongruous  in  the  statement  of  a 
sacrament  requiring  plain  language,  and  when  words  expressing  the 
idea  directly  are  so  numerons.  Therefore,  the  words  of  Christ 
must  be  taken  in  their  proper  and  best,  or  literal  meaning,  as  he 
utters  them  in  the  institution. 

They  also  claim  for  their  construction  the  reverence  that  is  due 
to  the  power  of  God.  They  charge  upon  the  opponents  of  this 
doctrine  a  want  of  regard  for  the  power  and  word  of  God,  the 
mighty  Saviour. 

Ljithers  Large  Catechism:  "It  is  the  word  that  makes  and  dis- 
tinguishes this  sacrament.  For  it  is  said  (accedat  verbum  ad 
elementum  et  fit  sacramentum),  the  word  coming  to  the  natural 
element  makes  it  a  sacrament.  This  declaration  of  St.  Augustine  is 
so  explicit  that  you  can  scarcely  find  one  more  excellent  in  his 
writings.  If  the  word  does  not  appropriate  the  element  to  the 
sacrament,  it  remains  a  mere  element.  Now,  it  is  not  the  word  and 
institution  of  a  mere  prince  or  emperor.  As  it  is  the  word  of  the 
Supreme  Majesty,  all  creatures  should  prostrate  themselves  and 
exclaim.  Yes,  it  is  as  he  says:  and  we  should  accept  it  with  all 
honor,  fear  and  humility." 

"  If  a  hundred  thousand  devils,  together  with  all  the  fanatics, 
should  exclaim,  How  can  this  be  so?  I  still  know  that  all  these 
spirits  and  learned  men  in  a  mass  are  not  as  wise  as  the  Divine 
Majesty." 

"To  these  words  of  Christ  we  constantly  adhere;  and  we  shall  see 
who  may  presume  to  overcome  Christ,  and  make  these  words  other- 
wise than  he  has  declared  them.  If  you  separate  the  words  from 
it,  there  is  nothing  but  bread  and  wine.     If  the  words  remain  with 


338  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  elements,  as  they  must  to  make  a  sacrament,  agreeably  to  these 
words,  the  body  and  blood  are  there.  As  the  mouth  of  Christ 
speaks  and  declares,  so  it  is.     He  can  neither  lie  nor  deceive." 

The  Person  of  Christ. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Confessions  with  regard  to  the  divine  person 
of  Christ  throws  very  strong  light  on  the  Lutheran  theory  of  the 
real  presence  in  the  sacrament.  I  will  endeavor  to  state  this  doc- 
trine and  the  argument  for  the  sacramental  presence  drawn  from  it, 
in  language  almost  identical  with  that  of  the  Form  of  Concord,  and 
largely  taken  from  it.     This  standard  says : 

"  We  believe  and  teach  that  although  the  Son  of  God  has  been  a 
distinct  and  entire  divine  person — the  true,  essential,  perfect  God 
with  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  from  eternity,  he  nevertheless, 
when  the  time  was  fulfilled,  assumed  human  nature  also  in  unity  of 
his  person,  not  in  such  a  manner  as  to  become  two  persons  or  two 
Christs,  but  Jesus  Christ  now  in  one  person,  is  at  the  same  time 
true,  eternal  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  from  eternity,  and  true 
man  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary.  These  two  natures  in  the  person 
of  Christ  are  never  separated  nor  commingled  with  each  other,  nor 
changed  one  into  the  other.  Each  nature  retains  its  essential 
properties  to  all  eternity;  and  that  the  essential  properties  of  the 
one  nature  never  become  the  essential  properties  of  the  other 
nature." 

"To  be  almighty,  eternal,  infinite,  to  be  present  everywhere  at 
the  same  time,  are  the  essential  attributes  of  the  divine  nature,  which 
never  become  the  essential  attributes  of  the  human  nature." 

"To  consist  of  flesh  and  blood,  to  be  finite  and  circumscribed,  to 
suffer,  to  die,  to  ascend,  to  descend,  to  move  from  place  to  place,  to 
be  pained  with  hunger,  thirst,  cold,  heat  and  the  like,  are  attributes 
of  the  human  nature." 

"  Each  nature  does  not  subsist  independently  in  Christ,  since  the 
incarnation,  so  as  to  constitute  with  each  a  separate  person ;  but  we 
conceive  these  natures  so  united  as  to  constitute  one  person  only,  in 
which  both  the  divine  and  the  assumed  human  nature  subsist  at  the 
same  time,  personally  united.  Not  only  the  divine,  but  the  assumed 
human  nature,  belongs  to  the  entire  person  of  Christ  since  the  incar- 
nation. The  person  of  the  incarnate  Son  of  God  cannot  be  an  entire 
person  without  his  humanity  any  more  than  without  his  divinity." 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  339 

The  human  nature  of  Christ  not  only  retains  its  original,  essential 
properties,  but  in  consequence  of  the  personal  union  with  the 
Divinity,  and  by  its  subsequent  exaltation,  it  has  been  elevated  to 
the  right  hand  of  Power,  Might  and  Majesty,  above  all  that  can  be 
named,  not  only  in  this  world  but  in  the  world  to  come. 

But  the  Christian  Church  has  ever  maintained  that  the  divine  and 
human  natures  in  the  person  of  Christ  are  so  united  as  to  have  a 
real  communion  with  each  other.  Yet  the  natures  are  not  com- 
mingled in  one  essence. 

On  account  of  this  personal  union  (which  without  the  real  com- 
munion of  the  natures  could  not  exist,)  not  the  bare  human  nature, 
the  attribute  of  which  is  to  suffer  and  to  die,  suffered  for  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world,  but  the  Son  of  God  himself  suffered  truly,  yet 
according  to  his  human  nature,  as  the  Apostolic  Symbol  testifies,  he 
died  truly,  although  the  divine  nature  can  neither  suffer  nor  die. 

By  virtue  of  this  personal  union  and  communion  of  th"e  natures, 
Jesus  the  Son  of  Mary  was  not  a  mere  man,  but  a  man  who  is  truly 
the  Son  of  God  the  Most  High.  By  virtue  of  this  union  and  com- 
munion he  also  wrought  all  his  miracles.  Likewise  in  his  death, 
when  he  died  not  simply  as  another  man,  but  zvitJi  and  hi  his  death, 
he  conquered  sin,  death,  Satan,  hell  and  eternal  perdition,  which  the 
human  nature  could  not  have  accomplished  without  a  union  with 
the  divine  nature. 

And  now  since  he  has  ascended  above  all  heavens,  he  really  fills 
all  things,  and  rules  and  reigns  not  only  as  God,  but  also  as  man 
everywhere  present,  from  sea  to  sea,  to  the  ends  of  the  earth ;  as 
St.  Mark  declares,  after  he  was  received  into  heaven  and  sat  on  the 
right  hand  of  God,  the  Lord  worked  with  the  Apostles,  confirming 
their  word  everywhere.  These  operations  he  accomplished  not  in 
a  mode  local  and  circumscribed,  but  in  consequence  of  his  omnipo- 
tence at  the  right  hand  of  God,  which  is  not  a  particular  place,  but 
the  almighty  power  of  God  which  fills  heaven  and  earth. 

The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ  is  in  entire  accord 
with  the  Christology  settled  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  Let  the 
preceding  statements  be  closely  considered.  Prior  to  the  incarna- 
tion Christ  was  a  distinct,  entire  divine  person,  the  true  essential 
perfect  God,  co-equal  with  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  from 
eternity.  Yet  when  he  assumed  human  nature  he  became  only  one 
person,  Jesus  Christ  the  true  eternal    God,  begotten  of  the  P^athcr 


340  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

from  eternity,  and  also  true  man,  born  of  the  virgin  Mary.  There 
are  two  natures,  but  only  one  person,  one  self-conscious  being.  The 
two  natures  are  never  separated,  and  yet  never  commingled.  Each 
nature  retains  its  essential  attributes,  which  can  never  be  transferred 
to  the  other  nature.  Yet  each  nature  does  not  subsist  independ- 
ently of  the  other  nature,  but  the  two  are  in  such  union  as  to  con- 
stitute one  person,  and  both  the  divine  and  the  human  natures  be- 
long to  the  one  person  Christ.  The  human  nature  not  only  retains 
its  original,  essential  properties,  but  in  consequence  of  the  personal 
union  with  the  divinity,  is  elevated  to  the  right  hand  of  Almighty 
power.  In  this  union  there  must  be  a  communion  of  the  one  nature 
with  the  other.  So  that  whatever  Christ  does  or  suffers,  he  does  or 
suffers  as  a  theanthropic  person,  as  Christ  the  divine-human  being. 
Although  God  cannot  suffer,  the  divine-human  Christ  suffers.  We 
cannot  say  that  the  man  separated  from  the  divinity  does  it;  nor 
that  the  divinity  separated  from  the  humanity.  But  Christ  suffered, 
died,  ascended.  Christ  rules  his  Church,  fulfils  his  promises,  is 
ever  with  his  people.  In  Christ  dwelt  all  the  fulness  of  the  God- 
head bodily. 

As  Leo  says,  "Two  natures  met  together  in  one  Redeemer,  and 
while  the  properties  of  each  remained,  so  great  a  unity  was  made  of 
either  substance  that  from  the  time  the  Word  was  made  flesh  in  the 
virgin's  womb,  we  may  neither  think  of  him  as  God  without  this 
which  is  man,  nor  as  man  without  this  which  is  God.  Each  nature 
certifies  its  own  reality  under  distinct  actions,  but  neither  disjoins 
itself  from  connection  with  the  other.  Nothing  is  wanting  from 
either  toward  the  other  ;  there  is  entire  littleness  in  majesty,  entire 
majesty  in  littleness ;  unity  does  not  introduce  confusion,  nor  does 
propriety  divide  unity.  There  is  one  thing  passable,  another  impas- 
sable, yet  his  is  the  contumely  whose  is  the  glory.  He  is  in  infirm- 
ity who  is  in  power ;  the  self-same  Person  is  both  capable  of  death 
and  conqueror  of  death.  God  did  then  take  on  him  whole  man  and 
so  knit  himself  into  him  and  him  into  himself  in  pity  and  in  power, 
that  either  nature  was  in  the  other,  and  neither  in  the  other  lost  its 
own  property." 

In  applying  this  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ  to  the  Lord's 
Supper,  the  Form  of  Concord  proceeds  thus: 

"  From  this  communicated  power,  therefore,  Christ  by  virtue  of  the 
words  of  his  testament  can  be  and  is  truly  present  with  his  body  and 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  34I 

blood  in  the  Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Supper.  In  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  Mary,  the  two  natures  are  so  united  that  in  him  dwelleth  all 
the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily.  Col.  ii.  9. 

"  In  executing  his  offices,  Christ  acts  and  operates  not  with  or 
through  one  nature,  but  in,  with,  according  to,  through  both  natures, 
or  as  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  says,  one  nature  operates  in  com- 
munion with  the  other  that  which  is  the  attribute  of  each  one. 

"  The  right  hand  of  God  is  everywhere,  at  which  Christ  according 
to  his  human  nature  is  seated,  in  deed  and  in  truth,  and  reigns  pres- 
ent, and  has  in  his  hands  and  under  his  feet  all  that  is  in  heaven  and 
on  earth ;  where  no  man  nor  angel  but  the  Son  of  Mary  alone  is 
seated,  hence  he  is  able  to  perform  that  which  we  assert.  The  word 
of  God  is  neither  false  nor  fallacious.  God  knows  and  has  within 
his  power  various  ways  in  which  he  can  at  any  time  be  present  in  a 
place,  and  not  in  one  only,  which  philosophers  call  local  or  circum- 
scribed." 

It  is  admitted  in  the  Confessions  that  Christ  ascended.  The 
ascension  was  real.  Christ's  body  really  went  to  heaven.  It  has  a 
local  presence  in  heaven.  Lutherans  do  not  teach  a  local  presence 
of  Christ's  body  on  earth.  But  they  hold  that  in  addition  to  the 
local  presence  of  that  body  in  heaven,  it  has  a  presence  on  earth 
which  is  not  local.  There  is  a  presence  of  that  body  in  the 
sacrament.  They  call  it  a  sacramental  presence.  The  doctrine 
with  regard  to  Christ's  person  as  taught  in  the  Confessions  would 
not  necessarily  prove  a  sacramental  presence.  The  proof  of  that 
presence  is  found  in  the  words  of  the  Saviour  and  those  of  St.  Paul. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ  only  shows  that  the  idea  of 
a  real  sacramental  presence  does  not  conflict  with  any  established 
Bible  truth,  nor  does  it  come  in  collision  with  reason.  Reason  and 
Scripture  harmonize  beautifully  with  the  doctrine  of  the  presence  of 
Christ's  body  in  the  Holy  Supper,  when  the  whole  subject  is  viewed 
in  the  light  of  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ's  person.  It  is  well  to 
guard  against  analogies  between  ourselves  and  our  Redeemer.  Yet 
there  is  something  analogous  between  man  and  Christ  with  regard 
to  the  union  of  two  natures  in  one  person.  Dr.  Shedd  says,  "The 
union  of  two  natures  in  one  self-conscious  Ego  may  be  illustrated 
by  reference  to  man's  personal  constitution.  An  individual  man  is 
one  person.  But  this  one  person  consists  of  two  natures, — a  mater- 
ial nature  and  a  mental  nature.  The  personality,  the  self-conscious- 
23 


342  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ness,  is  the  resultant  of  the  union  of  the  two.  Neither  one  of  itself 
makes  the  person.  Both  body  and  soul  are  requisite  in  order  to  a 
complete  individuality.  The  two  natures  do  not  make  two  individ- 
uals. The  material  nature  taken  by  itself  is  not  the  man;  and  the 
mental  part  taken  by  itself  is  not  the  man;  but  only  the  Jinion  of 
the  two  is.  Yet  in  this  intimate  union  of  two  such  diverse  substances 
as  matter  and  mind,  body  and  soul,  there  is  not  the  slightest  alter- 
ation of  the  properties  of  each  substance  or  nature.  The  body  of 
a  man  is  as  truly  and  purely  material  as  a  piece  of  granite;  and  the 
immortal  mind  of  a  man  is  as  truly  and  purely  spiritual  and  imma- 
terial as  the  Godhead  itself.  Neither  the  material  part  nor  the  men- 
tal part  taken  by  itself  and  in  separation,  constitutes  the  personality; 
otherwise  every  human  individual  would  be  two  persons  in  juxtapo- 
sition. There  is  therefore  a  material  '  nature '  but  no  material  'per- 
son'; and  there  is  a  mental  '  nature,'  but  no  mental  'person.'  The 
person  is  the  union  of  these  two  natures,  and  is  not  to  be  denomi- 
nated either  material  or  mental,  but  Jiiunan.  In  like  manner  the  per- 
son of  Christ  takes  its  denomination  oi  tlieantJiropic,  or  divine-hianati 
neither  from  the  Divine  nature  alone,  nor  the  human  nature  alone, 
but  from  the  union  of  the  two.  One  very  important  cosequence  of 
this  is,  that  tlie  properties  of  both  Jiatures  may  be  attributed  to  the  one 
person." 

In  a  complex  being,  constituted  of  two  parts,  each  part  by  virtue 
of  the  living  union  of  the  two  acquires  properties  not  possessed  in- 
herently in  itself  alone.  Matter  cannot  suffer  pain.  Yet  in  the 
living  union  of  the  two  constituent  parts  of  man,  we  say  the  nerves 
suffer  pain.  It  is  the  union  of  the  material  composing  the  nerves 
with  the  mind  that  gives  matter  the  susceptibility  to  pain. 

Why  then  should  any  one  question  the  statement  that  the  divine 
and  human  natures  in  the  person  of  Christ  are  so  united  as  to  have 
a  real  communion  with  each  other,  and  the  body  of  Christ,  although 
locally  in  heaven,  can  be  also  in  another  mode  present  in  the  Church 
on  earth  and  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper?  If  the  union 
of  matter  with  mind  in  man  gives  to  matter  certain  properties  which 
matter  separate  from  mind  does  not  possess,  who  shall  dare  to  limit 
the  communicating  power  of  the  union  of  Divinity  with  humanity 
in  the  person  of  Christ?  Is  not  Christ  Omnipotent?  Can  his 
words  ever  be  fallacious?  Shall  we  not  take  the  language  he  em- 
ploys on  the  most  sacred  of  all  occasions  in  its  proper  meaning,  in 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER. 


O^J 


its  natural  sense,  especially  when  there  is  nothing  in  Scripture,  nor 
in  science,  nor  in  reason  that  forbids  a  fair  and  natural  construction 
of  his  words? 

The  Zwinglian  Theory  Unsatisfactory. 

A  comparison  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine  with  the  Zwinglian  will 
show  at  the  first  glance  the  unsatisfactory  character  of  the  latter. 
To  make  the  Holy  Supper  merely  a  commemorative  act  is  to  take 
from  it  its  sacramental  character.  That  Christ  in  his  last  words,  in 
his  last  ordinance,  in  the  very  consummation  of  his  glorious  media- 
torial work,  in  the  very  climax  of  redemption,  when  imparting  the 
divinest  consolation  to  his  distressed  followers  and  instituting  a  chan- 
nel of  the  richest  blessings  for  his  people  for  all  time,  should  give 
nothing  more  than  a  commemorative  ceremony,  such  as  exists  among 
all  nations,  by  two  symbols  to  aid  the  mind  in  recalling  an  important 
event,  making  the  Holy  Supper  in  principle  nothing  more  than  a 
Fourth  of  July  celebration,  is  utterly  inconceivable.  It  is  the  baldest 
rationalism,  in  the  face  of  plain  words  spoken  by  the  Saviour,  and 
by  the  inspired  apostle. 

The  Calvinistic  Theory  Unsatisfactory. 

The  theory  seems  to  be  this:  That  Christ's  body  is  in  heaven 
only,  and  in  no  sense  in  the  elements ;  that  he  can  be  apprehended 
by  faith  only.  And  yet  that  our  communion  with  him  by  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  involves  a  real  participation — "not  in  his 
doctrine  merely — not  in  his  promises  merely — not  in  the  sensible 
manifestations  of  his  love  merely — not  in  his  righteousness  and 
merit  merely — not  in  the  gifts  and  endowments  of  the  Spirit  merely; 
but  in  his  own  true  substantial  life  itself;  and  this  not  as  compre- 
hended in  his  divine  nature  merely,  but  most  immediately  and 
peculiarly  as  embodied  in  his  humanity  itself,  for  us  men  and  our 
salvation." — Nevin. 

"Christ  is  the  bread  of  life,  by  which  believers  are  nourished  to 
eternal  salvation.  I  conceive  that  in  the  remarkable  discourse  in 
which  Christ  recommends  us  to  feed  upon  his  body,  he  intended  to 
teach  us  something  more  striking  and  sublime  (than  merely  believ- 
ing in  Christ);  viz.,  that  we  are  quickened  by  a  real  participation 
of  him  which  he  designates  by  the  terms  of  eating  and  drinking.  It 
is  not  seeing  bread  but  eating  it  that  administers  nourishment  to 


344  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  body;  so  it  is  necessary  for  the  soul  to  have  a  true  and  complete 
participation  of  Christ,  that  by  his  power  it  may  be  quickened  into 
spiritual  life."  "It  is  no  other  eating  than  by  faith."  "Those  whom  I 
oppose,  consider  eating  to  be  the  same  thing  as  believing ;  Avhile  I 
say  that  in  believing  we  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ,  because  he  is  made 
ours  actually  by  faith, -and  that  this  eating  is  the  fruit  and  effect  of 
faith.  They  consider  the  eating  to  be  faith  itself,  while  I  consider 
it  a  consequence  of  faith."  "In  Christ  was  life,  the  source  and  fount- 
ain of  all  creaturely  existence."  "Now  since  that  fountain  of  life  has 
come  to  dwell  in  our  flesh,  it  is  open  to  our  reach  and  free  use.  The 
very  flesh,  moreover,  in  which  he  dwells,  is  made  to  be  vivific  for 
vis,  that  we  may  be  nourished  by  it  to  immortality.  The  bread  that 
I  will  give  is  my  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world. 
In  these  words  Christ  teaches  not  simply  that  he  is  life  as  the  ever- 
lasting Word  descending  to  us  from  heaven,  but  that  in  thus  de- 
scending he  has  diffused  this  virtue  also  into  the  flesh  with  which 
he  clothed  himself,  in  order  that  life  might  flow  over  to  us  continu- 
ally." "We  conclude  that  our  souls  are  fed  by  the  flesh  and  blood  of 
Christ,  just  as  our  corporeal  life  is  preserved  and  sustained  by  bread 
and  wine.  Our  souls  could  not  find  their  ailment  in  Christ  unless 
Christ  truly  coalesce  into  one  with  us  and  support  us  through  the 
use  of  his  flesh  and  blood."  "I  do  not  make  Christ  an  object  simply 
of  the  understanding  and  imagination.  For  the  promises  present 
him  to  us  not  that  we  may  rest  in  contemplation  merely  and  naked 
notion,  but  that  we  may  enjoy  him  in  the  way  of  real  participation. 
And  truly  I  see  not  how  any  one  can  have  confidence  that  he  has 
redemption  and  righteousness  by  the  Cross  of  Christ,  and  life  by  his 
death,  if  he  have  not  in  the  first  place  a  true  communion  with  Christ 
himself"  "In  the  mystery  of  the  Supper,  under  the  symbols  of  bread 
and  wine,  Christ  is  truly  presented  to  us,  and  so  his  body  and  blood 
in  which  he  fulfilled  all  obedience  to  procure  our  justification;  in 
order  that  we  may  first  coalesce  with  him  in  one  body." — Calvin. 

"  Such  virtue  as  bread  has  in  nourishing  our  bodies  for  the  support 
of  the  present  life,  the  same  is  in  the  body  of  the  Lord  for  the 
.spiritual  nourishment  of  our  souls;  and  as  by  wine  the  hearts  of 
men  are  exhilarated,  their  strength  refreshed,  the  whole  man  invig- 
orated, so  our  souls  receive  like  benefit  from  the  Lord's  blood." 
Calvin.  "  The  body  of  Christ  is  eaten,  inasmuch  as  it  forms  the 
spiritual  aliment  of  the  soul.     We  call  it  aliment  in  this  sense  be- 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  345 

cause  by  the  incomprehensible  power  of  his  Spirit  he  inspires  into 
us  his  own  Hfe,  so  that  it  becomes  -common  to  us  with  himself,  in 
the  same  way  precisely  as  the  vital  sap  from  the  root  of  a  tree 
diffuses  itself  into  the  branches,  or  as  vigor  flows  from  the  head  of 
the  body  into  its  several  members." 

"The  character  of  Christ's  flesh  was  changed  indeed  when  it  was 
■received  into  celestial  glors^;  whatever  was  terrene,  mortal  or  per- 
ishable is  now  put  off  Still  however  it  must  be  maintained  that  no 
other  body  can  be  vivific  for  us,  or  may  be  counted  meat  indeed, 
save  that  which  was  crucified  to  atone  for  our  sins.  The  same  body 
then  which  the  Son  of  God  once  offered  in  sacrifice  to  the  Father, 
he  offers  to  us  daily  in  the  Supper,  that  it  may  be  our  spiritual 
aliment." 

These  passages  from  Calvin's  writing  show  clearly  his  opinion  on 
a  number  of  points.  The  citations  are  numerous  and  copious 
enough  to  set  forth  his  views  in  a  clear  light.  It  will  be  seen  that 
he  adopted  many  Lutheran  sentiments  on  the  Lord's  Supper.  In 
many  things  he  was  in  full  accord  with  the  Lutheran  standards  and 
the  views  of  the  early  Church.  He  held  that  the  believer  feeds  on 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  that  eating  his  flesh  and  drinking 
his  blood  meant  something  more  than  merely  believing.  He  held 
that  in  the  Holy  Supper  the  believer  eats  the  body  and  drinks  the 
blood  of  Christ.  His  language  is  often  in  harmony  with  that  of 
Luther  and  the  Lutheran  standards.  But  there  are  points  on  which 
he  deviated  widely.  His  Christology  was  defective,  a  Lutheran 
would  say.  He  held  indeed  with  the  Lutherans  that  the  body  on 
which  the  believer  feeds,  is  the  same  body  that  was  offered  in  sacri- 
fice on  the  cross.  Although  everything  mortal  and  terrene  in 
Christ's  body  was  put  away  when  he  ascended,  yet  his  body  since 
the  ascension  is  the  true  body  or  the  same  body  that  was  crucified. 
But  instead  of  holding  to  the  sound  Lutheran  doctrine  with  regard 
to  the  person  of  Christ,  that  by  virtue  of  the  union  of  the  divine 
and  human  natures  in  the  person  of  Christ  and  the  communion  of 
properties,  in  addition  to  the  local  presence  of  Christ's  body  in 
heaven,  by  his  almighty  power  he  can  cause  his  body  to  be  present 
elsewhere — in  the  Church  on  earth  and  in  the  sacrament  of  the 
Supper — Calvin  was  led  into  difficulty  and  confusion  and  a  measure 
of  self-contradiction,  by  his  theory  that  Christ's  body  could  have  no 
presence   anywhere  except   its   local    presence    in   heaven.     Hence 


\ 


346  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

while  he  retained  the  primitive  Christian  doctrine  that  the  beh'ever 
feeds  on  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  he  was  driven  by  his  doctrine 
of  the  limitation  of  the  bodily  presence  to  the  right  hand  of  God,  to 
adopt  unsatisfactory  methods  of  reconciling  this  with  his  sound 
views  as  to  feeding  on  the  body  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist.  His 
explanation  is,  that  by  faith  the  believer  feeds  on  that  body,  which 
remains  in  heaven.  This  involves  an  absurdity.  The  believing 
communicant  in  the  Lord's  Supper  is  not  transported  into  heaven 
as  Paul  was  once  rapt  into  heaven.  If  he  were  so  carried  by  a 
transport  into  the  third  heaven,  he  would  be  conscious  of  it,  as  Paul 
was.  How  then  can  he  by  faith  feed  on  food  as  far  removed  from 
him  as  heaven  is  from  earth  ?  Calvin  himself  says  it  is  not  by 
imagination  or  contemplation.  How  then  can  a  believer  sitting  at 
the  Lord's  table  in  a  church  on  earth  feed  on  the  substantial  food 
of  Christ's  body  and  blood  ?  Calvin  felt  the  difficulty.  And  how 
does  he  attempt  to  get  over  it  ?  I  will  quote  his  own  words.  "  It 
may  seem  incredible  indeed  that  the  flesh  of  Christ  should  reach  us 
from  such  immense  local  distance,  as  to  become  our  food.  But  we 
must  remember  how  far  the  secret  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  tran- 
scends all  our  senses,  and  what  folly  it  must  ever  be  to  think  of 
reducing  his  immensity  to  our  measures.  Let  faith  embrace  then 
what  the  understanding  cannot  grasp,  namely,  that  the  Spirit  unites 
things  which  are  locally  separated.  Now  this  sacred  communica- 
tion of  his  flesh  and  blood,  by  which  Christ  transfuses  his  life  into 
us,  just  as  if  he  penetrated  our  bones  and  marrow,  he  testifies  and 
seals  also  in  the  Holy  Supper;  not  by  the  exhibition  of  a  vain  and 
empty  sign,  but  by  putting  forth  there  such  an  energy  of  his  Spirit 
as  fulfils  what  he  promises."  Again  he  says  :  "  The  power  of  the 
Spirit  is  sufficient  to  penetrate  through  all  impediments,  and  to  sur- 
mount all  local  distance." 

Here  it  will  be  seen  that  to  reconcile  the  two  conflicting  dogmas 
Calvin  himself  resorts  to  this  solution,  namely,  attributing  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  a  miraculous  power.  Therefore  every  instance  of  a 
believing  communicant  feeding  on  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in 
the  Holy  Supper  involves  the  working  of  a  miracle  by  the  Holy 
Spirit.  How  much  more  natural  and  scriptural  the  Lutheran 
theory.  How  much  more  it  commends  itself  to  our  judgment.  If 
the  Holy  Spirit  be  omnipotent,  is  not  Christ  omnipotent  also  ?  If 
the  Holy  Spirit  have  such  an  energy  that  he  can  fulfil  all  his  prom- 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  347 

ises,  has  not  Christ  enerc^y  to  fulfil  his  promises  ?  If  the  power  of 
the  third  person  in  the  Trinity  is  sufficient  to  penetrate  through  all 
impediments  and  to  surmount  all  local  distance,  who  shall  dare  to  set 
limits  to  Christ's  ability  to  do  the  same?  Does  not  Christ's  power 
also  transcend  our  senses,  and  shall  we  think  of  reducing  his 
immensity  to  our  measures  ?  Why  then  imagine  that  the  Spirit  by 
his  almighty  power  should  convey  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
from  its  local  position  in  heaven  to  every  believing  communicant  on 
earth,  when  according  to  a  more  scriptural  Christology  the  body  of 
Christ,  by  virtue  of  the  union  of  the  two  natures  in  one  person,  and 
the  almighty  power  of  the  divine-human  Saviour,  has  a  presence 
(not  local)  with  his  people  when  they  receive  the  bread  and  the 
wine  in  the  Holy  Supper,  as  he  says,  "this  is  my  body,"  "this  is 
my  blood?"  If  Christ  by  his  own  inherent  power  could  raise  him- 
self from  the  dead,  has  he  not  power  to  fulfil  his*  own  words  con- 
cerning his  body  and  blood  ?  Why  then  resort  to  the  unnatural 
and  self-contradictory  theory  that  the  third  person  in  the  Trinity 
should  take  a  body  which  has  only  a  local  presence  in  one  place 
and  give  it  a  diffused  presence  all  over  the  sacramental  Church? 
Over  against  this  idea  we  offer  the  Lutheran  doctrine  as  scriptural, 
self-consistent,  harmonious,  beautiful,  and  commending  itself  to  the 
judgment  of  every  man  who  will  look  at  the  whole  subject  in  its 
proper  light. 

Harmonizes  the  Scriptures. 

The  Lutheran  doctrine  harmonizes  and  elucidates  other  passages 
of  the  Scriptures  bearing  upon  the  general  subject.  While  it  is 
conceded  that  the  Saviour  was  not  speaking  of  the  sacrament  of  the 
Holy  Supper  in  the  discourse  recorded  in  the  si.xth  chapter  of 
John's  gospel,  it  can  be  satisfactorily  explained  only  in  the  light  of 
the  Lutheran  doctrine.  "  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man 
and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you.  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh 
and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life.  For  my  flesh  is  meat 
indeed  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed"  (John  vi.  53-65.)  How  can 
a  Zwinglian  explain  this  passage  without  doing  violence  to  all  fair 
construction  of  language  ?  He  must  wrest  the  words  from  their 
proper  signification.  But  with  the  Augustana  and  the  Form  of 
Concord  before  us  there  is  no  difficulty — no  obscurity  in  these 
declarations.     The  body  which  was  broken,  the  blood  which  was 


348  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

shed,  in  the  great  atonement,  no  longer  terrene  or  material,  but 
heavenly  or  glorified,  imparting  life  and  salvation  to  the  believer, 
who  participates  in  the  Holy  Supper.  The  divine-human  Saviour, 
although  in  heaven,  is  with  his  people  on  earth,  and  gives  them  this 
spiritual  and  divine  food — his  true  body  and  blood,  crucified  and 
shed  for  our  redemption,  but  now  glorified  and  celestial — the  bread 
which  comes  from  heaven. 

This  doctrine  elucidates  with  equal  beauty  and  felicity  the  words 
of  Christ  when  he  says,  "As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself 
except  it  abide  in  the  vine;  no  more  can  ye,  except  ye  abide  in  me. 
I  am  the  vine  and  ye  are  the  branches.  He  that  abideth  in  me  and 
I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit"  (John  xv.  4,  5).  The 
most  intimate  union  subsists  between  Christ  and  those  that  partake 
of  his  heavenly  body  and  blood.  They  draw  their  spiritual  life 
from  him,  as  the*  branches  live  by  drawing  a  current  of  life-giving 
sap  from  the  vine.  The  bread  of  life  which  comes  from  heaven 
sustains  the  life  of  the  follower  of  Christ.  Ebrard  says :  "  The 
breaking  of  the  bread  serves  to  bring  into  view  Christ's  death;  the 
eating  of  the  broken  bread  is  a  symbol  that  this  death  is  appropri- 
ated in  the  way  of  a  living  union  with  the  Saviour  himself  As 
however  Christ,  in  giving  the  bread  to  eat  and  the  wine  to  drink, 
declares  them  to  be  the  pledge  of  the  new  covenant  itself  in  his 
blood,  it  follows  that  the  bread  and  wine  are  not  simply  symbols, 
but  that  they  serve  to  place  him  -who  eats  and  drinks  in  real  com- 
munion with  the  atonement  through  his  death.  And  since  such  a 
communion  with  Christ's  death  can  have  no  place  without  a  life- 
communion  with  Christ  himself,  or  since,  in  other  words,  the  new 
covenant  holds  in  the  forms  of  a  real  inward  and  living  fellowship 
only,  it  follows  again  that  the  Lord's  Supper  involves  for  the  worthy 
participant,  a  true,  personal,  central  communication  and  union  with 
Christ's  actual  life."  The  same  may  be  said  with  regard  to  the 
elucidation  of  the  Scriptures  which  represent  Christ  as  the  Head, 
and  believers  the  members  of  a  body. 

CONSUBSTANTIATION. 

The  Lutheran  Church  has  been  constantly  charged  with  holding 
the  doctrine  of  Consubstantiation.  Among  the  more  recent  theolo- 
gians of  respectable  standing,  who  have  given  forth  this  idea.  Dr. 
Shedd,  in  his  "History  of  Christian  Doctrine,"  *  says:  "  The  Augs- 

*Vol.  II.,  page  451. 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  349 

burg  Confession,  in  Art.  X,  teaches  that  'the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  truly  present  and  are  distributed  to  those  who  partake  of 
the  Supper.'  This  doctrine  of  Consubstantiation,  according  to  which 
there  are  two  factors — viz.,  the  material  bread  and  wine,  and  the 
immaterial  or  spiritual  body  of  Christ — united  or  consubstantiated 
in  the  consecrated  sacramental  symbols,  does  not  differ  in  kind  from 
the  Papist  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  according  to  which  there 
is  indeed  but  one  element  in  the  consecrated  symbol,  but  that  is  the 
very  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  into  which  the  bread  and  wine  have 
been  transmuted."  Many  writers  outside  of  the  Lutheran  Church, 
less  intelligent  than  Dr.  Shedd,  are  constantly  repeating  the  same 
charge.  In  conversation  with  ministers  of  other  denominations  we 
are  constantly  told,  "  You  Lutherans  hold  the  doctrine  of  Consub- 
stantiation." It  seems  indeed  to  be  almost  a  universal  opinion 
among  all  other  sects.  This  is  certainly  strange  when  we  remember 
how  uniformly  the  Lutheran  Church  has  denied  it  and  rejected  the 
doctrine  imputed  to  her.  We  can  only  account  for  the  extent  of 
the  erroneous  opinion  by  supposing  a  general  ignorance  of  the  idea 
attached  to  the  word  Consubstantiation.  What  do  the  standards 
and  the  theologians  of  the  Church  say  on  this  subject?  The  Form 
of  Concord  says,  "We  utterly  reject  and  condemn  the  doctrine  of  a 
Capernaitish  eating  of  the  body  of  Christ,  which  after  so  many  pro- 
testations on  our  part,  is  maliciously  imputed  to  us ;  the  manduca- 
tion  is  not  a  thing  of  the  senses  or  of  reason,  but  supernatural,  mys- 
terious and  incomprehensible.  The  presence  of  Christ  in  the  supper 
is  not  of  a  physical  nature,  nor  earthly,  nor  Capernaitish,  and  yet  it 
is  most  true."  The  Wittenberg  Concord  says,  "  We  deny  that  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  locally  included  in  the  bread."  Ger- 
hard says,  "  We  neither  believe  in  Impanation,  nor  Consubstantia- 
tion, nor  in  any  physical  or  local  presence  whatsoever.  Nor  do  we 
believe  in  that  consubstantiative  presence  which  some  define  to  be 
the  inclusion  of  one  substance  in  another.  Far  from  us  be  that  fig- 
ment. The  heavenly  thing  and  the  earthly  thing,  in  the  Holy  Sup- 
per, in  the  physical  and  natural  sense  are  not  present  with  one 
another."  Cotta  says,  "  The  word  consubstantiation  may  be  under- 
stood in  different  senses.  Sometimes  it  denotes  a  local  conjunction 
of  two  bodies,  sometimes  a  conmiingling  of  them,  as  for  example 
when  it  is  alleged  that  the  bread  coalesces  with  the  body,  and  the 
wine  with  the  blood,  into  one  substance.     But  in  neither  sense  can 


350  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

that  monstrous  doctrine  of  Consubstantiation  be  attributed  to  our 
church,  since  Lutherans  do  not  believe  either  in  that  local  conjunc- 
tion of  two  bodies,  nor  in  any  commingling  of  bread  and  of  Christ's 
body,  of  wine  and  of  his  blood."  Reinhard  says,  "  Our  Church  has 
never  taught  that  the  emblems  become  one  substance  with  the  body 
and  blood  of  Jesus,  an  opinion  commonly  denominated  Consubstan- 
tiation." Mosheim  says,  "  Those  err  who  say  that  we  believe  in 
Impanation.  Nor  are  those  more  correct  who  charge  us  with  be- 
lieving Subpanation.  Equally  groundless  is  the  charge  of  Consub- 
stantiation. All  these  opinions  differ  very  far  from  the  doctrine  of 
our  Church." 

The  reader  will  see  how  utterly  Lutherans  reject  all  ideas  of  a 
commingling  of  one  substance  with  another,  or  of  the  local  inclusion 
of  the  heavenly  with  the  earthly,  or  of  a  local  conjunction  of  the  two, 
and  even  of  a  local  presence  at  all.  The  use  of  the  words  in,  with, 
or  under,  seems  to  have  misled  the  masses  into  the  opinion  that  the 
Church  believes  in  Impanation  and  Consubstantiation.  But  the 
Church  rejects  both  doctrines.  Holding  that  Christ's  body  is  lo- 
cally in  heaven  only,  she  must  necessarily  reject  all  local  conjunc- 
tion, or  local  inclusion,  or  substantial  mingling  of  that  body  with 
material  elements.  If  it  were  always  borne  in  mind  that  it  is  Christ's 
heavenly  body  that  is  present  in  the  Holy  Supper,  no  one  could 
imagine  a  local  conjunction. 

The  Oral  Reception. 

It  might  be  asked,  why  has  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  not  been  more  generally  acceptable  to  persons  outside  of 
our  communion?  In  addition  to  the  fact  that  it  has  been  so  gene- 
rally misunderstood,  there  has  been  a  difficulty  in  the  minds  of  many 
on  account  of  the  positive  affirmation  in  one  symbol  of  the  oral 
reception  of  the  true  body  and  blood.  The  Form  of  Concord  says, 
"We  believe,  teach  and  confess  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
are  received  with  the  bread  and  wine,  not  only  spirituall)''  through 
faith,  but  also  orally  with  the  lips,  yet  not  in  an  ordinary,  but  in  a 
supernatural,  heavenly  manner,  on  account  of  the  sacramental 
union."  No  doubt  most  minds  find  it  difficult  to  discriminate  be- 
tween an  oral  and  a  material  reception.  If  the  reception  be  oral, 
they  fail  to  see  how  it  can  be  supernatural.  They  may  ask,  do  we 
receive  with  the  mouth  any  food  that  is  not  material  food  ?       It 


THE    LORDS    SUPPER.  35 1 

rnust  be  admitted  that  there  is  some  force  in  the  objection.  Men 
will  insensibly  and  almost  inevitably  regard  as  material  that  which 
is  received  by  the  mouth,  unless  they  bear  in  mind  the  preceding 
qualifying  phrase.  The  oral  reception  has  sometimes  been  a  stum- 
bling block  e\'en  with  members  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  Some  have 
even  wished  that  all  allusion  to  an  oral  reception  could  be  eliminated 
from  the  statement  of  doctrines.  It  is  not  in  the  Augsburg  Confess- 
ion. But  it  is  in  the  Form  of  Concord.  I  will  not  enter  upon  an 
inquiry  into  the  logical  deductions  from  the  brief  statements  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  whether  the  oral  reception  is  or  is  not  by 
implication  included  in  the  brief  words  of  the  Tenth  Article.  Find- 
ing it  so  clearly  laid  down  in  the  Form  of  Concord,  that  able  and 
scientific  development  of  the  Lutheran  system,  we  may  as  well  ex- 
amine carefully  the  doctrine  of  the  oral  reception. 

Let  the  qualifying  phrase  be  carefully  noticed.  "The  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  are  received  with  the  bread  and  wine,  not  only  spir- 
itually through  faith,  but  also  orally  with  the  lips,  not  hi  an  orduiary 
but  in  a  supernatural,  heavenly  vianner"  The  oral  reception  is  not 
then  an  ordinary  oral  reception.  It  is  an  oral  reception  in  a  super- 
natural, heavenly  manner.  The  qualifying  phrase  "supernatural, 
heavenly  manner,"  relieves  the  doctrine  of  all  idea  of  materialism. 
The  true  view  of  the  oral  reception  is  simply  this.  The  heavenly 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  being  in  the  sacrament  in,  with  or  under 
the  bread  and  wine,  not  by  local  conjunction  or  commingling  of 
substances,  not  in  the  way  of  a  local  presence,  but  merely  by  a  sac- 
ramental union,  during  the  whole  sacramental  transaction,  which 
sacramental  transaction  requires  not  only  the  words  of  Christ  and  the 
consecration  of  the  elements,  but  also  the  eating  of  the  bread  and 
the  drinking  of  the  wine,  while  the  bread  and  wine  are  received  by 
the  conmiunicant  orally  in  an  ordinary  way,  the  heavenly  body  and 
blood  being  there  in  the  sacramental  union,  during  the  whole  sac- 
ramental transaction,  (which  is  not  completed  until  the  bread  and 
wine  have  been  orally  received),  the  true  or  heavenly  body  and 
blood  are  also  received  not  in  ordinary  oral  eating  and  drinking, 
but  in  a  heavenly  and  supernatural  manner.  While  therefore  it  is 
called  an  oral  reception,  it  is  in  a  supernatural  and  heavenly  manner. 
After  all,  therefore,  the  ordinary  oral  eating  and  drinking  is  merely 
that  of  the  bread  and  wine.  The  reception  of  the  body  and  blood 
being  something  not  earthly  or  material,  but  heavenly,  is  in  a  super- 


352  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

natural  and  heavenly  manner.  In  the  act  of  the  communicant's 
eating  the  bread  and  wine,  he  receives  the  heavenly  food  in  a  super- 
natural manner — the  believing  communicant  to  the  confirmation  of 
his  faith  and  growth  in  grace,  the  unbelieving  communicant  to  his 
condemnation. 

Gerhard's  statement  of  this  point  is,  "  The  sacramental  eating  of 
the  body  of  Christ  is  none  other,  than  with  the  mouth  to  receive  the 
Eucharistic  bread,  which  is  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ 
(l  Cor.  X.  1 6).  This  sacramental  eating  is  said  to  be  spiritual, 
because  the  body  of  Christ  is  not  eaten  naturally,  and  because  the 
mode  of  eating,  like  the  presence  itself,  is  neither  natural,  carnal, 
physical  nor  local,  but  supernatural,  divine,  mystical  and  spiritual. 
*  *  *  The  word  of  God  is  the  food  of  the  soul,  and  is  yet 
received  by  the  bodily  ear." 

As  the  Augsburg  Confession  is  the  only  distinctive  symbol  uni- 
versally recognized  in  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  as  the  expression 
"with  the  mouth,"  or  "oral  reception"  is  not  found  in  the  August- 
ana,  nor  in  Luther's  Catechisms,  nor  in  Melanchthon's  Apology, 
nor  in  any  other  symbol  except  the  Form  of  Concord,  a  man  can  be 
a  sound  Lutheran  without  adopting  or  even  defending  this  expres- 
sion, found  only  in  the  statement  of  the  theologians  in  the  Form  of 
Concord. 

In  this  abstruse  subject  the  General  Synod  has  wisely  allowed 
liberty  of  sentiment.  It  seems  to  me  that  many  of  our  ministers 
have  not  elaborated  their  views  into  a  well-defined  conception  of 
the  whole  subject.  Most  Lutherans  in  this  country  believe  in  the 
presence  of  the  Saviour  in  the  Eucharist.  By  this  they  do  not 
simply  mean  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  the  presence  of 
Christ  as  a  divine  being.  They  understand  by  it  something  different 
also  from  the  presence  of  the  Saviour  promised  to  two  or  three  met 
in  his  name  for  ordinary  worship.  Some  speak  of  it  as  a  special 
presence  ;  some,  as  a  sacramental  presence.  Many  seem  not  to  have 
read  extensively  or  reflected  deeply  on  the  subject.  Their  want  of 
a  more  thorough  attention  to  it  may  arise  from  the  abstruse  and 
mystical  character  of  the  subject.  It  may  arise  from  the  difficulty 
of  divesting  their  minds  of  the  idea  of  materialism  usually  suggested 
by  the  words  "body"  and  "blood."  The  tendency  to  associate 
materialism  with  these  words  has  created  in  the  minds  of  a  portion 
of  the  laity  a  kind  of  aversion  to  the  use  of  the  terms  in  connection 


THE    LORDS    SUPPER.  353 

with  a  sacramental  presence.  To  them  it  appears  to  be  impossible 
to  divest  their  minds  of  the  impression  that  "body"  and  "blood" 
must  mean  something;  material,  carnal,  earthly.  This  feeling  has  no 
doubt  deterred  some  from  the  careful  study  of  the  theology  of  our 
Church  on  the  subject  of  this  sacrament. 

In  justice  therefore  to  the  Lutheran  Cluirch,  her  ministers  should 
impress  upon  the  minds  of  her  people  (and  so  far  as  opportunity 
offers,  on  the  minds  of  members  of  other  churches),  the  fact  that  the 
Lutheran  Church  in  all  lands  and  by  all  her  writers  rejects  all  idea 
of  a  presence  that  is  material,  or  carnal,  or  earthly;  and  that  no 
Lutheran  ever  did  hold  the  doctrine  of  a  local  or  material  bodily 
presence.  At  the  same  time,  emphasis  and  prominence  should  be 
given  to  the  fact  that  while  the  Church  in  her  standards  and  writ- 
ings of  many  of  her  honored  theologians,  uses  the  words  of  Christ 
and  Paul,  yet  by  "body"  and  "blood"  is  meant  something  heavenly, 
something  that  has  no  local  presence,  is  not  locally  included  in  the 
bread  and  wine,  that  does  not  mingle  with  the  substance  of  the 
material  elements  ; — that  while  the  Church  sometimes  uses  the 
words  "in,  zvith  and  wider','  she  rejects  the  doctrine  of  impanation, 
subpanation  and  consubstantiation. 

It  should  also  be  remembered  that  all  other  Protestant  standards 
of  the  large  denominations,  except  the  Zwinglians,  use  the  terms 
"body"  and  "  blood,"  in  defining  the  sacramental  presence.  The 
Calvinistic  standards  and  the  distinguished  Calvinistic  theologians 
of  the  Reformation  period  employ  the  same  terms  the  Lutherans 
use.  Prejudices  against  the  Lutheran  doctrine  vanish  when  the 
whole  subject  is  contemplated  in  its  spiritual  character. 

It  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  subject  is  a  great  mystery. 
Many  aspects  of  it  we  are  not  to  attempt  to  grasp,  much  less  to  set 
aside  by  our  own  reason.  Calvin  says,  "  They  are  preposterous  who 
allow  in  this  matter  nothing  more  than  they  have  been  able  to  reach 
with  the  measure  of  their  understanding.  When  they  deny  that  the 
flesh  and  blood  of  Christ  are  exhibited  to  us  in  the  Holy  Supper, 
Dcfi)ic  the  mode,  they  say,  or  you  wdl  not  convince  us.  But  as  for 
myself,  I  am  filled  with  amazement  at  the  greatness  of  the  mystery. 
Nor  am  I  ashamed,  with  Paul,  to  confess  in  admiration  my  own 
ignorance.  For  how  much  better  is  that,  than  to  extenuate  with 
my  carnal  sense  what  the  apostle  pronounces  a  high  mystery!" 

It  is  contended  by  our  theologians  that  the  Lutheran  doctrine  is 


354  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

much  older  than  the  Reformation ; — that  it  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
primitive  Church  during  the  first  four  centuries.  If  this  can  be 
estabHshed  beyond  doubt,  it  must  be  taken  as  a  high  testimony  in 
its  favor.  While  the  Christian  fathers  were  not  infallible,  it  is  strong 
presumptive  proof  of  the  soundness  of  a  doctrine,  that  the  earliest 
Christian  writers  have  presented  it  as  the  doctrine  of  the  universal 
early  Church  from  apostolic  times.  If  the  doctrine  of  the  real  pres- 
ence in  the  Eucharist  is  given  by  all  the  early  writers  as  the  univer- 
sal Church's  doctrine,  and  no  writer  has  alluded  to  any  teacher  who 
first  taught  it,  it  would  seem  probable  that  it  was  always  held  and 
taught  from  the  days  of  the  apostles  down.  On  this  subject  the 
testimony  of  Dr.  Pusey  will  be  regarded  as  possessing  great  weight, 
from  his  thorough  knowledge  and  extensive  research.  He  first  tes- 
tifies that  the  Romish  view  was  not  held  in  the  early  centuries,  but 
that  the  true  objective  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
under  the  bread  and  wine  was  then  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  He 
says,  "  I  have  gone  through  every  writer  who  in  his  extant  works 
speaks  of  the  holy  Eucharist  from  the  time  when  St.  John  the  Evan- 
gelist was  translated  to  his  Lord,  to  the  fourth  General  Council 
(451).  And  all  agree  in  one  consentient  exposition  of  our  Lord's 
words,  'This  is  my  body,  this  is  my  blood.'  Whence  this  harmony, 
but  that  one  spirit  attuned  all  these  various  minds  in  the  one  body 
into  one :  so  that  the  very  heretics  were  slow  herein  to  depart  from 
it?  However  different  the  occasion  may  be  upon  which  the  truth  is 
spoken,  in  whatever  variety  of  ways  it  may  be  mentioned,  the  truth 
itself  is  one  and  the  same — one  uniform,  simple,  consistent  truth, 
that  what  is  consecrated  upon  the  altar  for  us  to  receive,  what  under 
the  outward  elements  is  there  present  for  us  to  receive,  is  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ." 

A  distinguished  Lutheran  theologian  of  this  country  says,  "  The 
Lutheran  Church  believes,  on  the  sure  warrant  of  God's  word,  that 
the  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  remains  a  true  human  body,  and 
as  to  its  natural  and  determinate  presence  has  been  removed  from 
earth,  and  is  in  the  glory  of  the  world  of  angels  and  the  redeemed. 
She  also  believes  that  in  and  through  the  divine  nature  with  which 
it  forms  one  Person,  it  is  present  on  earth  in  another  sense  no  less 
true  than  the  former.  She  believes  that  the  sacramental  elements 
are  divinely  appointed,  through  the  power  of  the  Saviour's  own 
benediction,  as  the  medium  through  which  we  participate  after  a 


THE    LORDS    SUPPER.  355 

spiritual,  supernatural,  heavenly,  substantial,  objective  and  true 
manner,  'in  the  communion  of  his  body  and  of  his  blood.' 
.  "She  believes  that  the  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  really 
absent  in  one  respect,  and  just  as  really  present  in  another.  *  *  * 
It  is  present  without  extension,  for  the  divine  through  which  it  is 
present  is  unextended, — it  is  present  without  locality,  for  the  divine 
through  which  it  is  present  is  illocal.  It  is  on  earth,  for  the  divine 
is  on  earth, — it  is  in  heaven,  for  the  divine  remains  in  heaven;  and 
like  the  divine,  it  is  present  truly  and  substantially,  yet  incompre- 
hensibly." * 

*  Conservative  Reformation,  650,  651. 


ARTICLE  XL 


CONFESSION. 

By  a.  c.  wedekind,  d.  d. 


THE  Aitgsbiirg  Confession  may  be  compared  to  one  of  those 
grand  old  cathedrals  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Standing  without 
and  surveying  them,  you  get  a  very  indistinct  impression  as  to  what 
they  really  are.  Their  towering  walls  are  enormous  masses  of 
stone,  venerable  and  moss-covered;  their  lofty  windows  seem 
blurred  and  unintelligible  hieroglyphics ;  and  their  huge  domes 
appear  only  huge  riddles.  But  enter  one  of  these  sacred  fanes,  and 
a  scene  solemn,  grand,  and  harmonious,  almost  beyond  description, 
bursts  upon  the  view.  What  wondrous  carvings  !  what  gorgeous 
paintings!  what  magnificent  mosaics!  Each  window  now  seems  a 
new  revelation,  and  every  panel  of  the  frescoed  wall  and  dome  the 
embodiment  of  celestial  truth. 

So  it  is  with  our  venerable  Confession.  Viewing  it  only  from 
without,  there  seems  to  be  no  particular  beauty  that  we  should 
desire  it.  Its  structure  is  not  regarded  very  regular  nor  very  im- 
posing. Its  buttresses  have  been  very  much  battered  and  bespat- 
tered. But  enter  it  with  reverent  step  and  devout  heart,  and  you 
will  see  amazing  beauty  and  wondrous  symmetry.  You  will  behold 
a  grandeur  and  a  glory,  a  sublimity  and  a  majesty,  that  will  extort 
from  the  beholder  the  astonishment  of  Sheba's  queen  in  Solomon's 
palace:  "  I  believed  not  the  report  until  I  came  and  mine  eyes  have 
seen  it;  and  behold  the  half  has  not  been  told  me."  Every  pillar 
of  this  venerable  structure  is  an  ornament,  and  every  ornament  a 
pillar  of  divine  truth.  And  from  its  radiant  though  silent  dome 
there  comes  a  sacred  and  unceasing  effulgence,  which  has  prompted 


CONFESSION.        •  357 

many  an  enchanted  disciple  to  exclaim  :  "  It  is   good  for  us  to  be 
here;  here  let  us  build  tabernacles." 

Can  this  general  judgment  of  the  Confession  as  a  whole,  be  sus- 
tained in  reference  to  its  several  parts;  and  more  particularly  in 
reference  to  Article  XI,  which  the  unbroken  custom  of  my  prede- 
cessors in  this  course  of  lectures,  has  assigned  me?  An  hour's  time 
will  put  you  in  possession  of  the  facts  to  answer  this  question  as  far 
as  the  present  speaker  has  ability  to  reply  to  it.  The  article  itself 
reads  thus,  as  given  in  Mulier's  Symbolise  hen  Biieher. 

Latin  Text. 

"  De  Confessione  docent,  quod  absolutio  privata  in  ecclesiis  retinenda  sit, 
quamquam  in  confessione  non  sit  necessaria  omnium  delictorum  enumeratio. 
Est  enim  impossibilis  iuxta  psalmum  :     Delicta  quis  intellii^it?  " 

German  Text. 

"Von  der  Beichte  wird  also  gelehret,  dass  man  in  der  Kirchen  privatam 
absolutionem  erhalten  und  nich  fallen  lassen  soil,  wiewohl  in  der  Beicht  nicht 
noth  ist  alle  Missethat  und  Siinden  zu  erzahlen,  dieweil  doch  solches  nicht 
moglich  ist.     Psalm  xix.  12.      IVer  Kenttet  die  Afissert/iai  f" 

English  Translation. 

"  In  reference  to  Confession  it  is  taught,  that  private  absolution  ought  to  be 
retained  in  the  Church,  and  should  not  be  discontinued;  in  Confession,  how- 
ever, it  is  unnecessary  to  enumerate  all  transgressions  and  sins,  which  mdeed 
is  not  possible.     Psalm  xix.  12.     "  Who  can  understand  his  errors  ?  " 

I  may  as  well  confess  here  as  anywhere  else,  that  all  through 
the  preparation  of  this  paper  I  have  felt,  and  feel  now,  that  mine  is, 
perhaps,  a  thankless  task.  Whether  right  or  wrong,  Confession  and 
Absolution,  as  taught  in  this  Article,  have  fallen  into  general  disuse 
in  our  Church.  Some  treat  them  with  perfect  indifference;  others  with 
positive  aversion;  few,  comparatively,  observe  them.  Good  men 
and  able,  in  our  Zion,  have  expunged  the  Article  from  their  "  Plat- 
form;" whilst  others,  equally  good  and  able,  and  in  direct  conflict 
with  their  "  Fundamental  Principles,"  have  placed  it  where  the  Con- 
fessions do  not.  Prejudice  in  some  form  or  other  exists  against  it, 
which  makes  my  position  not  unlike  that  of  Demosthenes  who  spoke 
Greek  to  the  unsympathetic  waves  of  the  sea,  whilst  I  speak  English 
to  an  audience  in  whose  breasts  few,  if  any  vibratory  chords  are 
touched  responsive  to  my  words.  But,  "let  us  reason  together" 
and  see  what  we  have  gained  or  lost,  by  the  course  pursued. 
24 


35o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Now,  it  is  altogether  possible  that  some  men  may  lay  hold  of  this 
Article  as  boys  do  of  chestnuts;  they  get  their  fingers  full  of  prickly 
burrs,  and  then  in  their  disgust  fling  away  the  kernel  itself  Others, 
as  they  have  walked  through  the  rich  fields  of  our  Augustana,  may 
have  regarded  this  Article  as  one  of  those  unsightly  nodules,  that 
lie  so  uninvitingly  in  some  gardens  and  fields,  being  kicked  about 
as  utterly  worthless  and  offensive,  until  some  lapidist  comes  along, 
opens  the  stone,  and  lays  bare  a  nest  of  sparkling  gems.  One  thing 
is  very  certain,  that  some  of  the  most  godly  and  extensively  useful 
ministers  of  our  church  have  been  the  most  strict  and  conscientious 
observers  of  this  Article — such  men  as  Luther  and  Melanchthon, 
Bugenhagen  and  Arndt,  Harms  and  Biichsel;  whilst  on  the  other 
hand,  some  of  the  most  active  disorganizers  and  utter  failures  in  the 
ministry,  have  ranked  in  their  opposition  to  it;  such  men  as  Carl- 
stadt  and  the  whole  herd  of  rationalists  of  earlier  and  later  periods. 
Spener's  opposition  to  it  I  shall  notice  by-and-by.  Another  thing 
is  very  certain,  that  the  ridiculous  prejudice  against  this  Article  has 
its  origin  in  a  two-fold  misapprehension:  first,  in  confounding  it 
with  the  dreary,  perfunctory,  mercenary,  torturing,  ''ex  opere 
operate"  theory  of  Rome,  which  it  by  plain  and  indisputable  terms 
rejects,  and  from  which  it  is  as  far  removed  as  the  north  pole  is 
removed  from  the  south  pole :  secondly,  in  the  loose  and  unscrip- 
tural  notions  of  the  office  of  the  ministry.  As  these  points  will  meet 
us  by-and-by,  we  dismiss  them  for  the  present.  Besides,  there  are 
certain  words  with  which,  by  reason  of  their  abuse  or  perversion, 
men  have  associated  most  monstrous  ideas,  and  then  they  have 
become  afraid  of  them  as  if  they  were  some  veritable  spectres.  Take 
as  familiar  illustrations,  the  Avords  "Reviifals"  and  ''Christian  Union." 
In  a  proper  sense  they  carry  with  them  divine  conceptions ;  truths 
for  which  every  Christian  heart  beats  warmly  and  offers  daily  prayers 
most  importunately.  And  yet,  because  of  the  miserable  caricatures 
that  have  sought  shelter  beneath  these  sacred  names,  good  men  and 
true  have  applied  epithets  to  them,  unadvisably  perhaps,  hastily  I 
am  sure,  that  have  pained  the  Christian  heart. 

So  likewise,  and  for  the  same  reason,  the  words  "confession," 
"confessional"  and  "absolution,"  words  that  form  the  very  core  of 
our  Article,  seem  to  frighten  some  men  out  of  all  decent  proprieties. 
They  regard  them  as  words  of  horrible  incantation.  And  yet  these 
verv  words  are  associated  with  some  of  the  most  momentous  events 


CONFESSION.  359 

in  modern  histoiy.  The  "Glorious  Reformation"  was  born  in  the 
confessional.  The  "  old  monk"  at  Erfurt  gave  the  first  ray  of  light 
to  the  self-torturing  and  despairing  Luther  in  the  confessional;  and 
from  before  the  Vicar-General  Staupitz  in  the  Augustinian  monas- 
tery, the  great  Reformer  rose  from  his  knees  a  freely  forgiven 
sinner,  having  had  the  comforting  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith  in 
Christ  applied  to  his  tormenting  conscience  in  this  dreadful  confes- 
sional. This  institution,  too,  like  a  masked  battery,  gave  the  occa- 
sion to  the  Ninety-five  Theses,  that  fell  like  so  many  bomb-shells  into 
the  enemy's  camp  and  thus  marked  the  beginning  of  the  great  Refor- 
mation. Nay  more,  the  glory  and  the  shame,  the  brightest  and  the 
gloomiest  periods  of  our  Church's  history,  are  reflected,  as  from  a 
faithful  mirror,  from  this  dreaded  institution.  And  when  the  record 
of  her  inner  life,  which  has  not  yet  been  written,  shall  be  produced, 
I  predict  that  that  historian  will  stand  closest  to  the  XI.  Article  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession;  and  from  it,  as  his  central  point,  he  will 
evolve  a  true  church  life,  which  will  be  something  vastly  different 
from  the  present  table  of  dates  and  rattling  skeletons  of  departed 
worthies.  Let  me  yet  say,  in  passing,  that  since  our  Church  has 
grown  indifferent  to  this  Article  in  her  creed,  placing  it  among 
things  adiaphora — I  know  not  by  what  authority — discipline  and 
order  in  the  congregations,  and  power  in  the  office  of  the  ministry, 
have  fallen  into  gradual  and  mournful  decay. 

In  order  that  we  may  have  a  full  comprehension  of  this  doctrinal 
Article  of  our  Confession,  let  me  first  give  you  a  brief 

History 
that  underlies  the  Article.  This  is  very  ancient.  Its  roots  extend 
far  back  into  the  Old  Testament  dispensation.  Thus  Pharaoh  con- 
fessed to  Moses  and  Aaron,  saying :  "  I  have  sinned  against  the 
Lord  your  God  and  against  you ;  now,  therefore,  forgive,  I  pray 
thee,  my  sin,  only  this  once;  and  entreat  the  Lord  your-  God  that 
he  may  take  away  from  me  this  death  only."  Thus  Achan  con- 
fessed to  Joshua  and  said:  "Indeed  I  have  sinned  against  the  Lord 
God  of  Israel,  and  thus  and  thus  have  I  done  "  (detailing  his  crime). 
Thus  also  Saul  confessed  unto  Samuel  and  said:  "I  have  sinned  ; 
for  I  have  transgressed  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  and  thy 
words:  now,  therefore,  I  pray  thee,  pardon  my  sin,  and  turn  again 
with  mc  that   I   may  worship  the   Lord."     But  neither  Aaron,  nor 


360  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Joshua,  nor  Samuel,  could  grant  what  these  troubled  consciences 
demanded.  For  the  power  to  absolve  had  not  yet  been  granted  to 
man.  That  was  reserved  to  a  fuller  and  completer  dispensation  ; 
and  so  these  persons,  one  and  all,  "  went  to  their  own  place." 
Nevertheless,  as  Neander  remarks  :  "  Each  Jewish  synagogue  ex- 
ercised a  disciplinary  judgment  of  this  kind  over  their  members." 
In  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist,  all  classes  of  men  "  came  to  him  in 
the  wilderness,  and  were  baptized  of  him  in  Jordan,  confessing  their 
sins."  Surely  this  was  not  a  general,  but  private  confession.  As 
each  one  was  individually  baptized,  so  each  one  individually  con- 
fessed his  sins.  John  understood  the  desperate  depravity  of  the 
human  heart  too  well  to  have  these  multitudes  go  off  in  a  sort  of 
general  mourning  on  account  of  sin.  That  deceitful  thing  which 
each  man  carries  in  his  own  bosom — that  unfathomed  abyss  in 
which  mortal  plunmiet  has  never  yet  touched  bottom — in  which, 
amidst  all  fair  exteriors,  lie  coiled  broods  of  iniquity  like  nests  of 
vipers  under  old  stumps  in  fair  wheat-fields,  was  not  to  be  eased  off 
in  that  way.  Oh,  no!  There  was  the  Pharisee,  that  whited 
sepulchre ;  and  the  tax  gatherer,  that  enormous  cheat ;  and  the 
soldier,  that  petty  tyrant;  and  the  king  himself,  that  notorious 
adulterer;  each  one  got  attention,  and  each  one  got  his  portion,  too, 
in  due  season. 

Under  the  New  Dispensation  new  elements  enter  into  the  history 
of  this  subject.  The  Gospel  makes  immediate  and  complete  pro- 
vision for  pardon  and  peace,  to  the  repentant  and  believing  sinner. 
Three  modes  of  confession  of  sin  are  indicated.  First,  that  directly 
made  to  God ;  secondly,  that  made  to  those  who  are  "  stewards  of 
God's  mysteries  "  and  who  "  stand  instead  of  Christ ; "  and,  tliirdly, 
that  made  by  one  believer  to  another  (mutual).  With  the  first 
two,  the  divine  promise  of  pardon,  on  the  evangelical  condition  of 
repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  con- 
nected ;  with  the  last,  no  such  direct  promise  is  associated.  The 
first  is  not  questioned  ;  the  last  is  not  under  review ;  the  second 
enters  full-sized  into  our  discussion.  It  rests  directly  on  the 
teachings  of  Christ  Jesus  hmiself  He  is  our  righteousness. 
Through  him  we  obtain  remission  of  sin  in  his  blood.  But  the 
sinner  needs  assurance  of  this.  His  peace  demands  it  now.  He 
cannot  wait  until  he  stands  face  to  face  before  his  judge.  The 
thirsty   Israelite  in  the  wilderness  cannot  wait  to   slake   his  thirst 


CONFESSION.  361 

until  he  reaches  the  promised  land.  But  who  shall  offer  the  sinner 
this  quickening  word  ?  He  cannot  ascend  into  heaven  to  fetch  it 
thence;  nor  does  the  Lord  descend  from  heaven  to  bring  the  news; 
neither  is  there  a  voice  from  the  spirit-land,  saying:  "  Go  in  peace; 
thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee."  What  then  ?  Where  is  help  ?  The 
gracious  Lord  has  made  provision.  He  has  in  general  appointed 
his  Church  as  his  almoner;  and  in  that  Church  he  has  appointed 
his  representatives  as  the  "  stewards  of  his  mysteries."  They  are 
his  ministers ;  his  "  ambassadors,"  his  plenipotentiaries ;  to  them  is 
*'  committed  the  word  of  reconciliation."  Their  commission  reads 
thus:  "All  power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth;  go  ye 
therefore  into  all  the  world,"  etc.  "  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me, 
so  I  send  you."  "  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me,  and  he  that 
despiseth  you,  despiseth  me ;  and  he  that  despiseth  me,  despiseth 
him  that  sent  me."  And  he  breathed  upon  them  and  said:  Receive 
ye  the  Holy  Ghost.  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted 
unto  them  ;  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained." 
These  are  solemn  words.  They  are  not  the  "glittering  generalities" 
of  impotent  man,  but  the  pregnant  declarations  of  the  omnipotent 
Christ.  If  they  do  not  mean  what  they  say,  they  are  a  monstrous 
deception  ;  if  they  do  mean  what  they  say,  there  is  a  monstrous 
error  somewhere.  Common  sense  teaches  that  we  should  get  into 
the  clear  somehow  and  somewhere.  //  is  an  admitted  fact  that 
whatever  Christ  confided  to  his  apostles  as  something  belonging  to  his 
Chuj'ch,  could  not,  and  did  not,  expire  witJi  their  death.  And  yet, 
though  I  can  remember  sermons,  extending  over  a  period  of  thirty 
or  forty  years,  I  have  never  heard  one  on  this  text.  It  is  a  perfect 
"terra  incognita"  in.  Protestant  pulpits.  Why  is  this?  Does  this 
passage  not  belong  to  that  "  message  of  God  unto  men  "  which  we 
are  to  proclaim  "  whether  men  will  hear,  or  whether  they  will  for- 
bear?" Not  so  did  the  early  Church  understand  this  language,  in 
either  the  Latin  or  the  Greek  branch.  The  veriest  tyro  in  church 
history  knows  the  importance  and  the  comfort  this  language  had  to 
many  of  her  mart3q's  who  went  to  the  stake  from  the  confessional, 
wMth  a  heroism  and  enthusiasm  that  struck  awe  into  the  hearts  of 
their  executioners.  "  In  the  large  cities,"  says  Neander,  "  especially 
in  the  Greek  Church,  a  special  presbyter  was  appointed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  attending  to  the  duty  of  confession  and  of  determining  their 
proportion  of  church  penance.     By  reason  of  a  scandal,  created  by 


362  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  crime  of  an  ecclesiastic,  which  became  notorious,  the  patriarch 
of  Constantinople,  Nectarius,  was  led  to  rescind  this  office  about  the 
year  of  390."  And  it  is  the  testimony  of  the  church  historian  Sozo- 
men,  that  the  abolition  of  this  practice  had  an  injurious  influence  on 
the  general  state  of  morals.  If  the  evangelical  sense,  the  sense  of 
Christ,  had  been  retained,  without  the  errors  which  human  ingenuity 
and  cupidity  invented  and  added,  the  doctrine  of  private  confession 
and  absolution  would  have  continued  to  prove,  as  it  was  originally 
designed,  and  as  our  Confession  aims  to  restore,  an  tmspeakable 
blessing  to  the  body  of  Christ.  It  would,  however,  be  a  needless 
and  a  wearisome  repetition  of  church  history  to  adduce  the  number- 
less examples — striking  and  pointed  as  they  are — in  confirmation 
of  our  point.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  this  article  was  raised  to  the 
dignity  of  a  sacrament,  in  both  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  branches 
of  the  Church.  The  fatal  mistake  in  both  rested,  and  still  rests,  on 
the  Pelagian  heresy  in  regard  to  natural  depravity.  An  organic 
conception  of  sin,  is  foreign  alike  to  both  parties.  Hence  their 
torturing  process  of  the  enumeration  of  sins ;  hence,  too,  the  un- 
scriptural  notion  that  no  sins  can  be  pardoned  that  have  not  been 
enumerated.  It  is  at  once  seen  that  this  whole  theory  rests  on  the 
imposition  of  church  penances,  such  as  prayers,  fastings,  alms,  pil- 
grimages, etc.,  as  a  remedy  and  satisfaction  for  the  sins  confessed  ; 
w^hilst  the  evangelical  element,  which  our  Confession  brings  so 
pointedly  to  view,  is  entirely  ignored.  Faith  in  Christ  and  in  his 
all-sufficient  atonement  has  no  place  in  this  theory;  nor  has  the 
Bible  doctrine  of  man's  inability  to  know  all  his  faults. 

Under  Pope  Innocent  III.  (1225),  the  hitherto  observed  custom 
in  the  Church — by  no  means  uniform,  though  very  general — was 
enacted  into  an  inviolable  law  ;  and  thus  Anricidar  Confessioii,  that 
right  arm  of  the  papacy,  was  established.  It  was  distinctly  decreed 
that  all  sins  must  be  enumerated  to  the  priest  at  least  once  a  year, 
and  those  not  enumerated  could  not  be  forgiven.  The  Lutheran 
Church  has  private  but  not  attricnlar  confession.  She  rejects,  as  an 
impossibility,  the  torturing  and  unscriptural  notion  of  specifically 
recounting  all  our  sins  ;  though  if  it  will  do  any  one  any  good  to 
mention  some  that  particularly  burden  the  conscience,  like  a  gentle 
mothtr  dealing  with  an  errmg  child,  she  will  seek  first  to  awaken 
a  sense  of  guilt  and  shame,  then  bring  about  an  acknowledgment  of 
the  faults,  and  then  make  known  the  glad  tidings  of  a  full  and  com- 


CONFESSION.  363 

plete  remission  of  sin  through  the  atoning  sacrifice  of  her  blessed 
Lord.  Can  anything  be  more  becoming,  more  in  harmony  with 
Christ's  spirit  or  Christ's  example,  more  in  the  very  centre  of  gospel 
institutions,  than  this  practice  ? 

When,  therefore,  Spcncr,  in  1667,  abolished  private  confession, 
which  up  to  his  time  had  been  almost  exclusively  the  form  in  use  in 
the  Church,  and  instituted  the  general  form  now  in  use  in  most  ot 
our  congregations,  he  was  moved  to  this  step  not  by  any  inherent 
opposition  to  the  practice  itself,  but  by  circumstances  beyond  his 
control.  By  reason  of  his  multiplied  duties  he  could  not  properly 
attend  to  this  onerous  one  in  the  manner  prescribed  in  his  own 
'"Explanations  of  Luther's  Catecldsm''  He  was  frequently  called 
upon  to  administer  absolution  to  persons  with  whom  he  had  no 
acquaintance  whatever.  The  good  man  overlooked  the  fact  that  he 
fared  no  better  in  the  general  form.  He  knew  as  little  of  the  flock 
in  general  to  whom  he  announced  the  public  absolution,  as  he  did 
of  the  individuals  in  particular  whom  he  declined  to  absolve.  Con- 
sistency has  always  been  a  jewel.  Spener,  with  all  his  excellencies, 
forms  no  exception.  But  the  thing  that  offended  him  most,  was 
the  small  sum  of  money  which  was  usually  given  for  confession, 
which,  in  the  eyes  of  the  uneducated  multitude,  gave  to  this  duty 
the  appearance  of  buying  off  their  sins.  His  righteous  soul  was 
vexed,  and  very  properly,  at  this  sad  inheritance  from  popery.  To 
attend  to  this  duty  properly  demanded  a  great  increase  of  godly 
ministers;  and  as  the  outlook  for  this  was  not  very  flattering,  he  cut 
the  Gordian  knot  by  abolishing  the  institution  altogether.  I  will 
not  now  say  whether  it  was  wise  or  otherwise.  But  this  brings 
directly  before  us 

The  Design  of  Private  Confession. 

The  Augustana  itself  teaches  (Art.  XXV.)  that  "Confession  is  not 
commanded  in  the  Scriptures,  but  that  it  was  instituted  by  the 
Church.  Yet  by  our  ministers  it  is  taught  with  diligence  that  con- 
fession, because  of  absolution,  which  is  the  chief  part  in  it,  should 
be  retained  for  the  purpose  oi  consoling  alarmed  consciences,  and  for 
some  other  reasons."  Beyond  all  controversy  it  roots  deeply  and 
primarily  in  Arts.  H.  and  X.  of  our  Confession,  which  treat  respect- 
ively of  human  depravity  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  Often  does  the 
Christian   feel  with  the  Psalmist:   "I  am   in  misery,  and  like  unto 


364  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

him  that  is  at  the  point  to  die :  even  from  my  youth  up  thy  terrors 
have  I  suffered  with  a  troubled  mind.  Thy  wrathful  displeasure 
goeth  over  me,  and  the  fear  of  thee  hath  undone  me."  "  My  sins 
have  taken  such  hold  upon  me  that  I  am  not  able  to  look  up ;  yea, 
they  are  more  in  number  than  the  hairs  of  my  head,  and  my  heart 
hath  failed  me."  These  earnest  confessions  are  but  the  sad  echoes 
of  Jehovah's  teachings,  that  "the  imagination  of  man's  heart  is  evil 
from  his  youth,"  that  "the  heart  is  deceitful  above  all  things  and 
desperately  wicked:  who  can  know  it?"  In  this  soil  our  Article  is 
partly  rooted;  but  the  pole-root  stands  in  our  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  That  holy  ordinance  the  Christian  approaches  like  Moses 
the  burning  bush.  As  he  stands  at  the  altar,  he  feels  that  he  stands 
on  holy  ground.  He  is  about  to  attend  to  the  highest  and  holiest 
mystery  of  his  religion,  receiving  the  body  and  blood  of  his  blessed 
Lord.  "  Das  Heilige  begehrt  man  heilig  zu  begehen."  How  shall 
he  do  this  worthily?  His  personal  unworthiness  he  deeply  feels. 
Here  comes  in  the  great  excellence  of  our  Article.  As  God  has 
graciously  provided  to  still  the  cries  of  the  tender  infant  at  its 
mother's  bosom,  so  has  he  ordained  that  his  Church — the  spiritual 
mother  of  his  children — shall  quiet  their  cries  for  pardon  and  peace. 
She  is  his  appointed  almoner,  and  her  ministers  are  "  the  stewards 
of  his  mysteries."  To  them  "  is  committed  the  word  of  reconcilia- 
tion." And  in  no  way  can  they  do  this  so  solemnly  and  impres- 
sively as  when  they  deal  with  the  humble,  contrite,  penitent,  in  this 
private  conference.  There,  if  anywhere,  the  heart  may  be  melted; 
its  deceptions  exposed;  its  weaknessess  laid  bare;  its  cries  for 
mercy  be  expressed;  its  hunger  and  thirst  for  righteousness  be  fully 
awakened;  its  ignorance  or  misapprehension  of  the  nature  and 
design  of  the  holy  communion  be  thoroughly  rectified,  and  the 
offers  of  grace  and  peace  be  apprehended  and  welcomed.  In  that 
holy  transaction  pastors  deal  not  with  rude  strangers  or  unknown 
foreigners,  but  with  the  erring,  distressed,  deeply  exercised  members 
of  their  own  flocks.  And  there  the  office  of  the  pastor,  the  shep- 
herd, reaches  its  culminating  glory.  There  he  stands,  virtually  "in 
Christ's  stead."  There  he  may  unbind  burdens,  ease  consciences, 
and  loose  souls  "whom  Satan  has  bound,  lo!  these  many  years." 
Through  the  preached  word  he  has  invited  the  guests  to  the  gospel 
feast;  in  this  private  conference  he  seeks  to  array  them  in  the 
wedding  garment.     And  does  it  require  a  great  stretch  of  imagi- 


CONFESSION.  365 

nation  to  suppose  that  the  King  himself  will  be  present  to  view  his 
guests  ?  May  we  not  then,  in  view  of  these  solemn  facts,  say  with 
.even  the  rationalistic  Hase  :  "  The  Church,  by  permitting  this  article 
of  her  faith  to  become  obsolete,  has  suffered  to  go  down  one  of  the 
most  efficient  means  at  her  command  to  care  for  the  souls  of  her 
children." 

The  design  of  private  confession,  as  practiced  in  our  Church,  is 
succinctly  stated  by  the  Theological  Faculty  at  Wittenberg,  under 
date  of  June  15th,  1619.     They  say,  among  other  things  : 

"There  are  three  particular  reasons  for  observing  it.  I.  It 
affords  a  pastor  an  opportunity  for  special  interviews  with  each 
communicant  to  ascertain  whether  he  is  properly  qualified  for  that 
holy  ordinance,  that  is,  whether  he  has  thoroughly  examined  him- 
self as  St.  Paul  requires,  whether  he  has  proper  views  of  the  nature 
and  design  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  whether  he  lives  at  peace  with  his 
neighbors,  whether  he  is  really  willing  to  renounce  all  evil  ways  in 
which  he  may  have  been  living,  and  whether,  in  a  word,  any  defect 
may  be  found  in  the  applicant  which,  through  instruction  and  ex- 
hortation, might  be  remedied.  2.  It  affords  also  an  appropriate 
opportunity  to  any  member  that  may  have  any  special  difficulties, 
wants  or  desires  in  reference  to  which  he  may  wish  an  interview 
with  his  pastor  alone.  3.  It  applies  in  a  personal  and  direct  way 
God's  grace  and  forgiveness  of  sins  to  the  individual  and  contrite 
conscience,  that  are  generally  offered  to  all  believers  in  the  word." 
—  Conn.  Wit.,  II.,  ijg. 

Can  any  Christian  man,  minister  or  member,  file  a  single  objection 
to  this  institution  as  thus  set  forth  ?  Does  it  not  "  commend  itself 
to  every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God  ?"  Could  we  but  get 
rid  of  the  vulgar  prejudice  that  confounds  this  Article  with  the 
Romi.sh  practice  of  auricular  confession  and  return  to  it,  how  many 
hundreds  and  thousands  of  our  members  that  go  annually  to  ruin 
might  be  saved!  The  felt  want  of  something  of  the  kind  is  manifest 
in  the  introduction  of  "  inquiry  meetings,"  or  of  "  laboring  with 
anxious  souls  around  the  altar  " — faint,  very  faint  imitations  of  our 
doctrine,  not  unlike  boys  astride  their  sticks  trying  to  act  the  part 
of  light-horsemen !  How  humiliating  thus  to  forsake  the  pure 
fountain  and  go  to  the  broken  cistern  that  holds  no  water !  How 
utterly  futile  these  plans  are  as  a  substitute  for  the  Lutheran  plan ! 
For  who  that  has  any  acquaintance  with  them  does  not  know  that 


o 


66  •       AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 


many  a  sad  heart  comes  away  from  them   that  may  appropriately 
adopt  the  student's  language  in  Gothe's  Faust : 

"I  feel  as  confused  by  all  you  have  said, 
As  'twere  a  mill-wheel  going  round  in  my  head." 

From  the  design  of  private  confession  and  absolution,  let  us  next 
turn  to  the 

Estimate  put  upon  it  by  the  Reformers  and  the  Church  in 

Purer  Days. 
And  here  the  position  itself  of  our  Article  deserves  some  notice. 
It  stands  immediately  connected  with  the  two  recognized  sacra- 
ments of  the  Church,  looks  back  to  both  and  reaches  into  both. 
Whatever  our  Church's  well  defined  position  at  present  may  be, 
touching  the  number  of  her  sacraments,  it  hardly  admits  of  a  doubt 
that  both  Luther  and  Melanchthon  gave  some  sort  of  sacramental 
authority  to  absolution.  Articles  XI.  and  XII.,  that  is,  ours  and  the 
one  following,  form  in  reality  but  one;  the  XII.  describing  the  inner 
condition  or  essence  of  repentance,  whilst  the  XI.  sets  forth  the  ex- 
ternal application  of  the  gospel  to  the  penitent;  the  two  together  are 
called  "  das  Beichtsacrament,"  "  sacramentum  poenitentije."  Then 
Article  XIII.  treats  of  the  number  and  uses  of  the  sacraments,  with- 
out specifically  mentioning  that  number.  This  gives  a  strong  pre- 
sumptive evidence  that  the  Augustana  itself  regards  our  Article, 
somehow,  in  the  light  of  a  sacrament.  Else  why  should  Art  XIII. 
be  separated  from  Articles  IX.  and  X.  which  treat  of  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper,  if  this  idea  was  not  in  the  minds  of  the  framers  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession?  What  possible  reason  could  be  assigned 
why  the  XI.  and  XII.  Articles  should  be  sandwiched  between  the 
Articles  descriptive  of  the  two  sacraments,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  Article  that  treats  of  the  number  and  uses  of  those 
sacraments?  Is  it  likely  that  the  most  logical  and  methodical  mind 
of  that  brilliant  epoch  of  the  Church's  history,  the  scientific  scholar 
and  erudite  author  of  the  ''Loci  Theologici" — Philip  Melanchthon — 
would  commit  such  a  blunder?  Yea,  that  he  should  repeat  the 
blunder  of  a  blunder  previously  perpetrated  by  Luther  in  his 
ScHWABACH  Articles,  in  which  the  9th,  loth  and  iith  have  pre- 
cisely the  same  position  as  in  the  Augustana  ?  There  is  no  escap- 
ing the  point,  that  the  juxtaposition  of  these  three  Articles  by  both 


CONFESSION.  367 

Luther  and  Melanchthon,  indicates  their  conception  of  them  as  sacra- 
ments. But  aside  from  this  presumptive  evidence,  there  are  numer- 
ous statements  of  the  most  positive  character  which  directly  affirm 
the  sacramental  nature  of  our  Article,  (i)  Luther's  repeated  juxta- 
position of  baptismus,  absolutio,  et  coena  Domini,  as  three  co-equal 
sacraments;  "' drcicr glcicJiwcrtigcr  Sacraiiicntcy^  In  his  tract  on 
"  The  Babylonian  Captivity  of  the  Church,"  he  attacks  the  scholastic 
number  of  seven  sacraments  as  held  by  the  Romish  church,  and 
reduces  the  number  to  the  above  mentioned  three. f  So  likewise  in 
his  sermons  and  other  writings,  the  same  idea  occurs  again  and 
again.  (2)  Melanchthon's  unequivocal  declarations  in  the  Apology. 
Under  Article  XII.  he  says:  "  Et  absolutio  proprie  dici  potest  sacra- 
mentnm  paenitentiae  ;  "  and  again  under  Art.  XIII.  we  read :  "  Vere 
igitur  sunt  sacramenta  baptismus,  coena  Domini,  absolutio,  quje  sacra- 
mentum  pcenitentiae.  Nam  hi  ritus  habent  mandatum  Dei  et  pro- 
missionem  gratiae."  "  So  sind  nun  rechte  Sacramente  die  Taufe, 
das  Nachtmahl  des  Herrn  und  die  Absolution.  Denn  diese  haben 
Gottes  Befehl,  haben  audi  Verheissung  der  Gnade."  "  True  Sacra- 
ments, therefore,  are  Baptism,  the  Lord's  Supper  and  Absolution. 
For  these  are  commanded  by  God  and  have  the  promise  of  his 
grace."  It  will  be  observed  that  there  is  no  distinction  made  here 
as  to  their  relative  importance  and  power.  What  is  asserted  of  one 
is  asserted  with  equal  force  and  directness  of  the  others.  There  is 
no  subordination  or  elevation  as  to  one  over  against  the  others. 
There  are  other  testimonies  to  the  same  fact,  as  e.  g.  the  Saxon 
Visitation  Articles  (1528),  the  Wittenberg  Reformation  (1545),  the 
Leipzig  Interim  (1548).];  There  is  a  singular  and  not  unimportant 
coincidence  which  in  this  connection  corroborates  what  has  just 
been  stated  ;  it  is  this  :  many  of  the  oldest  communion  cups  in  a 
large  number  of  Lutheran  churches  are  engraved  with  three  designs 
emblematic  of  Baptism,  the  Lord's  Supper  and  Absolution.  Is  it 
conceivable  that  in  the  Lutheran  Church,  with  its  well  known 
veneration  for  the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  such  things  , would  have 
been  tolerated  as  a  mere  freak  of  fancy ;  or  do  they  not  rather  point 
like  so  many  finger-boards  to  the  correctness  of  the  theory  here 

*  See  Dr.  Zbcklin,  Augsburg  Confession.     1870,  page  242. 

fSecKostlin,  520-533. 

J  See  Schmid's  Mel.,  p.  53,  70,  141,  438,  518,  588. 


368  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

under  review  ?  If  now,  in  the  face  of  all  this,  our  "  Confessions  must 
be  accepted  in  every  statement  of  doctrine  in  their  own,  true,  origi- 
nal and  only  senses  ;  that  those  who  set  them  forth  and  subscribe 
them  must  not  only  agree  to  use  the  same  words,  but  must  use  and 
understand  them  in  one  and  the  same  sense  ;  "  it  follows  that  either 
our  practice  must  change,  or  this  formula  must  be  received  "  cum 
grano  salis." 

In  that  most  excellent  work,  for  the  English  dress  of  which  the 
gratitude  of  the  whole  Church  is  due  to  two  honored  Professors  of 
these  institutions,  and  which  ought  to  lie  next  to  the  Bible  on  each 
minister's  table — Sclimid's  Doginatik — we  have  the  following  testi- 
mony of  Martin  Chemnitz,  that  "  prince  of  the  theologians  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession." 

"Our  theologians  have  often  said  that  they  would  not  contend, 
but  willingly  grant  that  absolution  should  be  ranked  among  the 
Sacraments,  because  it  has  the  application  of  a  general  promise  to 
the  individuals  using  this  service.  *  *  *  *  Though  it  is  not 
properly  and  truly  a  sacrament  in  the  way  or  sense  in  which  Bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  sacraments;  but  if  any  one,  with 
this  explanation  and  difference  added,  would  still  call  it  a  sacrament 
on  account  of  the  peculiar  application  of  the  promise,  the  Apology 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  declares  that  it  would  not  oppose  the 
idea."* 

Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  we  have  no  ultra  theory  on  this 
point  to  advocate,  but  simply  to  bring  out  the  whole  truth,  as  far  as 
we  are  able,  on  this  Article  of  our  Confession.  One  thing  is  be- 
yond all  dispute,  that  the  fathers  of  our  Church  made  much  more  of 
this  Article  than  many  of  her  sons  do  to-day.  In  the  estimation 
of  Luther  himself  it  had  an  importance  that  not  a  few  would  regard 
as  bordering  on  extravagance.  In  his  "Warning  of  the  Church  at 
Frankfurt  to  beware  of  the  Doctrines  of  Zwingli  "  (1533),  he  says, 
among  other  things :  "  If  I  had  thousands  upon  thousands  of  worlds, 
I  would  ratJier  lose  them  all  than  suffer  the  smallest  part  of  Con- 
fession to  be  set  aside  in  the  church.  For  to  Christians  it  is  the 
first,  most  needed,  and  most  useful  school,  in  which  they  learn  to 
understand  God's  word  and  their  faith,  which  cannot  be  so  effect- 
ively  done  by  public   instruction  and  sermons."     Again,  speaking 

*  Doctrinal  Theology  of  the  Ev.  Luth.  Church — H.  Schmid,  D.  D,  Hay  and 
Jacobs,  p.  542. 


CONFESSION.  369 

of  the  inestimable  value  and  importance  of  absolution  to  young  and 
inexperienced  Christians,  and  to  awakened  and  tender  consciences 
in  general,  he  says:  "  Tf  we  duly  appreciated  the  subduing  and 
humbling  influence  which  this  confession  has  upon  the  heart,  we 
would  dig  for  it  in  the  earth  and  travel  a  thousand  miles  to  secure 
it."  "I  would  not  suffer  it  to  be  taken  away  from  me,  no,  not  for 
all  the  wealth  of  the  whole  world  ;  for  I  know  the  strength  and 
comfort  I  have  myself  derived  from  it.  I  would  have  been  com- 
pletely overwhelmed  by  Satan  and  unbelief,  but  for  this  institution." 
The  inflexion  of  this  view  occurs  in  every  possible  form  throughout 
Luther's  writings.  John  Arndt,  whose  piety  and  devotion  to  God 
and  his  Church  no  one  calls  in  question,  against  whom  the  charge 
of  "  dead  formalism  "  would  fall  as  harmlessly  as  a  snow-flake 
against  the  Battery  in  New  York  harbor,  and  of  whom  a  celebrated 
Romanist  said  :  "  If  you  had  more  Arndts  it  would  be  all  the  better 
for  you,  and  the  worse  for  us,"  traced  his  acquaintance  with  the 
human  heart,  and  a  large  measure  of  his  success,  to  the  conscien- 
tious discharge  of  this  duty.  And  the  popularity  of  his  True 
CJiristianity  is  greatly  owing  to  what  he  learned  in  the  confessional. 
In  that  wonderful  book,  as  in  the  Psalms  of  David,  Christians,  of 
every  degree  of  attainments,  see  their  own  photographic  likenesses 
of  doubts,  and  unbelief,  and  spiritual  trials,  from  originals  that  sat 
before  this  master  in  Israel  in  private  confession.  Of  the  saintly 
Louis  Harms  it  is  said,  that  he  often  spent  nine  liours  a  day  in  these 
private  conferences  with  his  parishioners !  Is  it  a  wonder  that  such 
results  followed  as  are  recorded  of  Herrmansburg,  and  that  have 
revolutionized  the  "  Liineburger  Haide,"  and  made  it,  perhaps,  the 
loveliest  and  most  fruitful  garden  of  the  Lord  at  present  to  be  found 
on  the  face  of  the  earth?  How  shallow  and  shameless,  not  to  say 
contemptible,  in  the  presence  of  such  facts,  sounds  the  hue  and  cry 
of  "dead  formalism,"  "high  church  ritualism,"  and  "tendency  to 
Rome,"  against  men  of  God  that  have  been  faithful  and  true  in  their 
adherence  to  the  doctrines  and  usages  of  the  church!  And  how 
such  self-complacent  neophytes  should  be  admonished  to  go  to 
school  awhile  to  men  whose  shoe-latchets  they  are  not  worthy  to 
untie! 

Hear  yet  the  testimony  of  the  great  and  good  Biichsel  of  Berlin, 
whose  late  pastoral  letter  that  has  reached  us  sounds  like  the  sweet 
song  of  the  dying  swan.  In  his  "  Erinncrungen  aus  dem  Leben 
eines  Landgeistlichcn,"  Vol.  I,  262,  he  says  : 


370  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"In  the  midst  of  this  great  awakening,  the  felt  necessity  of  pri- 
vate confession  became  apparent.  Among  the  old  Lutherans  it  had 
been  generally  observed.  At  first  but  few  came;  gradually  the 
number  increased.  These  were  trying  and  weighty  hours  for  me. 
Each  one  desired  to  see  me  alone,  and,  if  possible,  unobserved  by 
others.  Hence  not  a  few  came  after  ten  o'clock  at  night.  The 
minute  details  with  which  they  entered  into  their  sinful  course  of 
life  consumed  much  time,  so  that  it  was  frequently  long  after  mid- 
night before  I  could  lay  aside  my  clerical  robes  and  seek  rest  for 
my  exhausted  body.  We  often  speak  of  the  comparative  innocence 
of  .the  rural  population;  but  what  abominations  and  crimes  were 
revealed  to  me,  especially  in  the  directions  of  dishonesty  and  lewd- 
ness !  There,  too,  there  were  many  who  avowedly  were  in  search 
of  finding  faults  in  their  own  lives,  and  who  tortured  themselves 
not  a  little,  by  construing  that  into  sin  which  the  most  tender  con- 
science would  hardly  regard  as  such.  Great  was  the  anxiety  of 
those  who  remembered  their  offences  against  departed  ones. 
Nearly  everybody  spoke  of  sins  committed  against  parents  long 
since  buried.  Through  this  private  confession  I  obtained  not  only  a 
clearer  and  fuller  insight  into  the  workings  of  human  depravity  and 
the  dectitfulness  of  the  human  heart  in  general,  but  also  of  my  ozvn 
heart  in  particular.  Nowhere,  and  on  no  occasions,  did  I  feel 
greater  impulses  to  earnest  and  importunate  prayer.  My  agitation 
became  often  so  great  that  the  livelong  night  I  could  not  close  an 
eye.  There  is  something  in  the  intercourse  with  souls  in  deep  dis- 
tress that  awakens  our  sympathies  to  such  an  extent  as  to  make  us 
participants  of  their  anxieties  and  bearers  of  their  burdens." 

How  suggestive  is  this  quotation.  It  shows  the  value  of  this  in- 
stitution of  the  church  as  beyond  all  estimate.  For  the  timid  and 
the  bold,  the  inexperienced  and  the  veterans  in  crime,  it  proved  a 
blessing  which  no  general  confession,  no  mere  pastoral  visits,  no 
public  instruction — which,  in  sliort,  no  method  whatsoever  could 
have  so  well  secured.  It  hardly  need  be  stated  that  Biichsel  has 
been  one  of  the  most  successful  pastors  of  the  present  century. 
Thousands  of  precious  blood-bought  souls  will  in  the  last  day  arise 
and  call  him  blessed,  as  the  instrument  in  God's  hand  through 
whom  they  obtained  peace  in  believing. 

And  right  here  comes  in  the  question  of  ministerial  authority  in 
its  relation  to  our  Article.     It   is  not  seriously  questioned  that  our 


CONFESSION.  371 

office  is  of  Divine  origin.  Even  the  human  element  employed  in 
inducting  us  into  it  is  ordained  of  God.  The  world  makes  no  min- 
isters; the  Church  does.  But  the  Church  is  Christ's  body,  of 
which  he  is  the  all-glorious  head.  In  this  Church,  and  nowhere 
else,  are  to  be  found  the  works  of  the  Spirit.  The  world  knows 
him  not,  neither  can  receive  him.  When,  therefore,  a  sinner  is  con- 
victed, when  he  sees  himself  ruined,  utterly  lost  and  undone,  it  is 
through  the  Word  in  the  hands  of  the  Spirit.  But  in  this  condi- 
tion of  misery  and  wretchedness  he  is  not  to  remain,  God  has  no 
pleasure  in  his  condemnation.  He  has,  therefore,  made  provision 
for  his  immediate  relief  The  Gospel,  with  all  its  appliances  and  its 
institutions,  is  designed  for  his  benefit.  Among  these  the  ministry 
holds  a  conspicuous  place.  "  How  beautiful  are  the  feet  of  them 
that  preach  the  gospel  of  peace,  and  bring  glad  tidings  of  good 
things."  These  glad  tidings  belong  to  all  who  hear  the  gospel,  and 
who  avail  themselves  of  its  rich  and  all-sufficient  provisions. 
Those  who  with  child  like  simplicity  and  trust  accept  its  proffers  of 
grace  and  mercy,  are  saved.  No  other  instrumentality  is  needed. 
They  accept  God,  and  God  accepts  them.  They  are  his  adopted 
children  and  He  is  their  gracious  Father.  But  there  are' thousands 
upon  thousands  who  are  not  of  this  class.  They  are  full  of  doubts 
and  misgivings ;  their  faith  is  weak  ;  their  knowledge  is  very  im- 
perfect;  they  are  near  the  kingdom,  but  are  nevertheless  without 
comfort  and  peace.  W'hat  is  to  be  done  for  them?  Shall  they  for- 
evermore  remain  in  that  unsettled  condition?  Would  the  gospel 
of  peace  be  good  news  to  them?  Certainly  not.  Here  then  the 
beautiful  and  parental  character  of  our  Church  comes  in.  She  has 
provided  for  all  such  in  our  Article.  She  brings  together  the  pros- 
trate child  of  sin  and  sorrow  with  Christ's  appointed  minister.  The 
difficulties  of  the  former  may  be  remov^ed  by  the  assistance  of  the 
latter.  The  ignorance  of  the  one  may  be  corrected  by  the  know- 
ledge of  the  other.  A  sacred  and  most  solemn  interview  between 
the  distracted  culprit  and  God's  accredited  ambassador  is  here  most 
graciously  provided.  All  the  wants  of  the  former  may  here  be  sup- 
plied by  the  divinely  authorized  grace  proclaimed  by  the  latter. 
The  educational  element  of  our  institution  is  here  brought  fully  to 
view.  It  is  not  simply  to  confer  peace,  but  it  is  also,  and  particu- 
larly, to  make  known  the  conditions  of  peace.  If  sin  is  to  be  par- 
doned, it  must  be   on  the    revealed  conditions   of  Almighty   God 


372  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

himself.  Any  other  supposed  method  is  absolute  fallacy  and  blas- 
phemy. What  now?  The  faith  of  many  is  genuine,  but  feeble. 
How  are  they  to  be  brought  to  the  aid  provided  for  them?  Again 
and  again  have  they  heard  the  general  proclamation  of  God's  grace. 
But  with  it  all  they  are  not  at  peace  with  God.  In  Art.  XXVIII. 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  we  have  the  desired  direction.  There 
we  read : 

"The  office  of  the  minister  according  to  Christ's  teaching  is:  to 
preach  the  word,  administer  the  sacraments,  forgive  sin,  defend  the 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  rebuke  open  transgressors  and 
put  under  ban  the  incorrigible.  *  *  *  j^j  these  several  appoint- 
ments the  congregations,  according  to  divine  order,  are  to  yield 
obedience  to  the  ministers,  as  Christ  teaches:  'Whoso  heareth  yon 
heareth  vie."' 

Should  now  the  blessed  Saviour  stand  visibly  before  the  humble 
penitent  and  say  to  him  as  he  said  to  the  man  sick  of  the  palsy : 
"Son,  be  of  good  cheer;  thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee:"  does  any  one 
doubt  the  prompt  and  immediate  obligation  of  the  contrite  to  con- 
fide in  Christ's  word?  Yea,  would  not  his  unbelief  be  an  absolute 
insult  to  Christ's  person  and  language?  Would  it  not  be  a  sub- 
stantial declaration  that  either  Christ  was  insincere  in  what  he 
promised,  or  that  he  was  unable  or  unwilling  to  do  what  he  said? 
In  either  case  it  would  make  him  out  a  liar.  Soften  down  the 
language  as  much  as  you  please,  that  at  last  will  be  the  outcome. 

How  now  stands  the  case  in  reference  to  Christ's  ambassadors — 
the  plenipotentiaries  of  the  King  of  glory;  the  men  "who  stand  in 
his  stead;"  "who  are  the  stewards  of  His  mysteries;"  "/^  whom  is 
committed  the  word  of  reconciliation V  What  saith  the  Lord? 
"Whoso  heareth  you,  heareth  me;  and  whoso  dcspiseth  yon,  despise  th 
meT  "As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  Whose- 
soever sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto  them ;  and  whosoever 
sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  Could  language  be  plainer? 
Would  it  not  be  belittling  the  subject  to  argue  about  it?  Would 
not  that  itself  indicate  a  latent  mistrust  in  the  word  of  Christ  the 
Lord?  So  that  noble  band  of  heroes,  consisting,  not  of  beardless 
boys  who  in  their  verdancy  babble  they  know  not  what,  but  of 
princes,  professors,  jurists  and  theologians; — men  of  the  ripest 
scholarship,  of  the  profoundest  intellect,  of  -the  broadest,  deepest, 
most  varied  experience,  and  of  the  most  fervent  devotion  to  God  and 


CONFESSION.  373 

his  truth,  confessed,  intelligently,  unreservedly  and  frankly,  before 
the  whole  world,  at  Augsburg,  the  doctrine  of  the  power  of  the 
keys,  involved  in  the  above  Scriptures,  as  one  of  the  most  precious 
jewels  of  the  true  evangelical  doctrine.     In  Art.  XXV.,  they  say: 

"The  people  are  diligently  instructed  with  regard  to  the  comfort 
afforded  by  the  words  of  absolution,  and  the  high  and  great  estima- 
tion in  which  it  is  to  be  held ;  for  it  is  not  the  voice  or  word  of  the 
individual  present,  but  it  is  the  word  of  God  who  here  forgives  sins; 
for  it  is  spoken  in  God's  stead,  and  by  his  command.  Concerning 
this  command  and  power  of  the  keys,  it  is  taught  with  the  greatest 
assiduity  how  comfortable,  how  useful  they  are  to  alarmed  con- 
sciences, and  besides  how  God  requires  confidence  in  this  absolu- 
tion, no  less  than  if  the  voice  of  God  was  heard  from  heaven;  and 
by  this  we  comfort  ourselves,  and  know  that  through  such  faith  we 
obtain  the  remission  of  our  sins."  • 

Brave  words,  bravely  spoken  !  They  give  no  uncertain  sound. 
They  have  the  ring  of  honest  hearts  and  earnest  convictions  in 
them.  They  show  no  sign  of  mawkish  fear  on  account  of  vulgar 
prejudice.  Well  would  it  have  been  for  the  church,  if  a  like  tone 
and  fearless  character  had  pervaded  her  through  all  her  history! 
The  chilling  eclipse  of  skepticism,  indififerentism  and  v^aunting 
rationalism  would  never  have  darkened  her  bright  day.  Leaning 
on  the  arm  of  her  Beloved,  she  would  have  gone  forward  m  the 
strength  and  spirit  of  her  Lord,  "  conquering  and  to  conquer."  She 
would  to-day  not  have  to  mourn  over  the  sad  defection  of  so  many 
of  her  children,  nor  present  the  pitiable  spectacle  of  fratricidal  war- 
fare in  her  ranks — "  Ephraim  vexing  Judah,and  Judah  striving  with 
Ephraim."  Nor  is  this  all.  One  of  the  sorest  incidental  evils,  re- 
sulting from  the  practical  ignoring  of  our  Article,  is  the  ''decay  of  the 
potuer  and  influence  of  the  Christian  ministry.  However  unwelcome 
and  humiliating  the  admission,  the  fact  is  as  notorious  as  it  is 
lamentable.  Doubtless  there  ,are  other  causes  for  this  sad  state  of 
things  besides  the  one  mentioned;  but  we  unhesitatingly  affirm  that 
this  one  is  chief  Having  abdicated  the  position  assigned  it  by 
Christ,  it  has  largely  forfeited  the  respect  and  confidence  with 
which  the  Lord  invested  it.  Tiie  gold  has  become  dim.  The  light 
is  hid  under  a  bushel.  The  salt  has  lost  its  savor.  And  feeling  its 
waning  power,  what  tricks,  what  puffings,  what  disgusting  sensation- 
alisms are  resorted  to,  to  catch  the  popular  ear  and  to  galvanize 
25 


374  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

itself  momentarily  into  an  ephemeral  notoriety!  Meanwhile,  the 
upper  ten  derisively  smile,  while  the  lower  ten  thousands  can  with 
difficulty  repress  their  honest  contempt. 

The  Power  of  the  Keys. 

It  is  sometimes  supposed  that  the  Power  of  the  Keys,  as  involved 
in  this  whole  discussion,  refers  not  so  much  to  the  remission  of  sin 
before  God,  but  rather  to  church  censures.  So  \h&  "  Presbyterian 
Confession  of  Faith  "  seems  to  understand  it.  In  Art.  II.  chap,  xxx., 
it  says:  "  To  these  officers"  (church  officers  over  against  civil)  "the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  are  committed,  by  virtue  whereof 
they  have  power  respectively  to  retain  and  remit  sins,  to  shut  that 
kingdom  against  the  impenitent  both  by  the  word  and  censures,  and 
to  open  it  unto  penitent  sinners  by  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  and 
by  absolution  from  censures,  as  occasions  shall  require."  It  is  not 
denied  that  this  idea  is  involved  in  it  (Matt,  xviii.  17,  18),  but  it  is 
stoutly  denied  that  this  idea  exhausts  it.  Why  should  the  blessed 
Redeemer  repeat  with  so  much  peculiarity  and  circumstantiality, 
just  before  leaving  the  world,  what  had  already  been  so  plainly 
revealed  ?  The  whole  context  is  plainly  against  such  an  unwarrant- 
able limitation.  Hearken  to  Christ's  language.  He  speaks  not  of 
any  church  difficulty,  or  of  any  church  discipline,  but  of  his  grand 
mission  to  earth.  "As  my  father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you." 
This  mission  was  man's  reconciliation  with  God.  The  cause  of 
controversy  was  sin — "that  abominable  thing  which  the  Lord 
hates."  "  To  put  away  sin  "  was  therefore  to  remove  the  cause  of 
offense  and  to  render  consequent  reconciliation  possible.  To  con- 
vince men  that  he  "  had  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sin,"  was  one 
great  point  of  his  appearing  among  them ;  and  now  as  he  was  about 
to  return  to  the  Father,  he  says:  "As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even 
so  send  I  you."  And  that  you  may  be  fully  equal  to  the  mission, 
"  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost.  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit  they  are 
remitted  unto  them,  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  re- 
tained." 

In  very  truth,  the  gospel  proclamation  is  nothing  else  than  a  set- 
ting forth  the  perfect  redemption  accomplished  by  Christ  for  all 
men.     It  is  in  effect  saying: 

"  Be  of  good  cheer,  ye  sinners;  Christ  has  blotted  out  your  sins; 
he  has  reconciled  you  to  God ;  he  has  procured  for  you  the  divine 


CONFESSION.  375 

favor;  he  has  fulfilled  for  you  the  divine  law;  he  has  procured  for 
you  a  righteousness  sufficient  for  the  judgment  of  God ;  he  has  over- 
come for  you  death,  hell  and  the  devil ;  he  has  acquired  for  you 
the  worthiness  of  entering  into  heaven:  in  short,  Christ  has  already 
accomplished  the  work  of  your  salvation.  Therefore  think  not  that 
you  must  propitiate  God  by  any  kind  of  suffering,  and  atone  thus 
for  your  sins ;  think  not  that  by  some  work  or  other  you  must  earn 
something  before  God;  that  by  your  repentance,  by  your  contri- 
tion, by  your  reform,  by  your  struggles,  you  must  save  yourselves. 
No!  All  that  is  already  accomplished  !  You  shall  do  nothing  now 
but  accept  that  which  Christ  has  done  and  suffered  for  you  and 
given  to  you ;  put  your  trust  in  it,  believe  in  it,  live  and  remain  in 
this  belief;  and  by  this  belief  finally  gain  salvation  and  enter  into 
heaven." 

Such  is  the  complete  redemption  work  of  Christ  our  Saviour  set 
forth  in  the  Gospel,  the  proclamation  of  which  is  nothing  else  than 
the  publication  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  to  men  on  earth,  which 
God  himself  confirms  in  heaven. 

"  In  short,"  says  Prof  Walther,  to  whom  I  am  indebted  for  the 
above  quotation,  "  the  Gospel  is  a  universal  absolution,  brought  from 
heaven  to  the  whole  world  by  men,  sealed  with  the  blood  and  death 
of  Christ,  and  confirmed  by  God  himself  most  grandly  and  solemnly 
in  the  glorious  resurrection  of  our  Saviour.  And  just  because  the 
Gospel  is  an  absolution  of  all  men,  on  account  of  the  perfect  redemp- 
tion of  the  world,  which  is  already  accomplished,  therefore  also  a 
minister  of  the  Gospel  may  and  shall,  in  the  name  of  God,  assure 
each  and  every  man,  who,  as  a  poor  sinner,  desires  forgiveness  of  the 
remission  of  his  sins.  Denying  the  minister  this  perogative  is  deny- 
ing him  the  power  of  proclaiming  the  Gospel  in  its  entireness  and 
completeness.  For  whosoever  believes  with  all  his  heart  that  Christ 
has  blotted  out  the  sins  of  all  men,  how  can  he  take  exception  to 
Christ's  minister  saying  to  a  man  who  professes  to  believe  in  Christ, 
Thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee!" 

It  cannot,  however,  be  repeated  too  often  that  our  Church  ignores 
and  abhors  the  Romish  "ex  opere  opcrato"  theory.  Hence  abso 
lution  without  faith  in  Christ  is  only  an  unmeaning  form,  since,  as 
has  been  stated  again  and  again,  absolution  is  nothing  else  tiian  the 
application  of  the  Gospel  to  the  individual  that  seeks  it.  So,  on  the 
other  hand,  repentance  without  remission  of  sins  is  only  an  unmean- 


3/6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ing  torture  to  no  practical  end.  It  is  simply  Judas  betaking  himself 
to  the  halter,  or  Saul  falling  upon  his  own  sword.  Why  will  men 
not  understand  that  absolution  is  not  the  word  of  man,  but  the  word 
of  the  living  God?  It  is  Christ  speaking  through  his  minister;  it  is 
the  King  of  heaven  negotiating  through  his  accredited  ambassadors 
the  most  solemn  treaty  of  peace  with  his  rebellious  but  repentant 
subjects  on  earth.  Whoever  comes  to  private  confession  must  come 
stripped  of  all  self-righteousness ;  must  make  peace  with  his  neighbor 
if  he  has  lived  at  variance  with  him;  must  make  full  restitution 
if  through  fraud  or  treachery  he  has  enriched  himself;  must  forsake 
all  sinful  ways  in  which  he  has  lived;  in  short,  he  must  not  come 
in  the  spirit  of  the  bragging  Pharisee,  but  in  the  crushed,  self- 
condemned  spirit  of  the  publican,  and  he  shall  go  justified  to  his 
home. 

In  this  institution,  too,  it  will  be  revealed  whether  the  pastor  him- 
self has  tasted  and  seen  that  the  Lord  is  good,  and  that  they  only 
are  blessed  that  trust  in  him;  whether  he  himself  has  rested  on 
Jesus'  bosom  and  felt  heaven  in  the  full  throbbings  of  that  heart  that 
loved  itself  to  death  for  the  guiltiest  and  the  filthiest  of  our  race. 
Orthodoxy  is  a  great  and  a  blessed  thing,  and  no  man  with  a  grain 
of  common  sense  will  speak  disparagingly  of  it;  but  unquickened 
by  the  spirit  of  Christ,  it  is  only  a  painted  corpse  whose  rosy-red 
lips  and  cheeks  betray  the  daubings  of  a  bungling  pencil,  but  whose 
death-chill  repels  the  hand  that  would  touch  it.  The  best  institutions 
have  become  corrupt  in  the  hands  of  graceless  men.  The  pastor 
who  knows  not  his  own  heart  with  its  deep  folds  and  self-deceptions; 
who  realizes  not  that  his  own  righteousness  is  but  a  whitened  sep- 
ulchre, and  whose  native  virtues  are  only  the  sparkling  scales  of 
the  serpent,  how  will  he  remove  the  bandage  from  the  eyes  of  the 
blind? 

Benefits  of  this  Institution. 

The  minister  is  not  only  a  preacher,  he  is  also  a  pastor,  a  shep- 
herd. And  what  conscientious  pastor  does  not  know  and  mourn 
over  the  difficulties,  as  the  Church  is  at  present  organized,  to  be- 
come acquainted  with  the  inner  life  of  his  flock.  To  many  this  is 
absolutely  a  "  terra  incognita."  Little  does  he  know  of  the  struggles, 
the  doubts,  the  terrible  conflicts,  and  the  fiery  darts  of  the  enemy 
with   which   his  flocks  are  assailed.     Thousands  of  young  and  old 


CONFESSION.  'i^'^'] 

go  annually  to  ruin  wh^  might  have  been  saved  by  a  timely  warn- 
ing, a  kind  word,  a  faithful  private  interview,  and  who  perhaps 
longed  and  yearned  for  it,  but  because  no  regular  arrangement  of 
this  sort  existed,  they  were  either  afraid  or  ashamed  to  break  the 
ice,  and  so  they  perished.  Nor  is  there  at  present  any  remedy. 
Pastoral  visitations,  where  these  are  even  still  in  use,  do  not  reach 
the  case.  There  is  so  much  formality  and  such  civil  starchness  in 
them,  that  they  amount  to  very  little  at  best.  The  coveted  privacy, 
the  confidential  unbosoming  one's  self  under  four  eyes,  cannot  be 
attained.  This  is  neither  the  fault  of  the  pastor  nor  of  the  people. 
The  difficulty  lies  in  the  present  system.  The  holy  and  confiden- 
tial relation  of  pastor  and  people,  compared  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
that  of  husband  and  wife,  may  exist  in  name,  because  the  Bible  calls 
it  so ;  in  fact  it  is  a  myth.  Say  about  it  what  you  please,  or  say 
nothing  about  it ;  the  present  relation  between  pastor  and  people  is 
that  of  a  public  speaker  to  a  public  audience.  In  the  original  or- 
ganization of  the  Church,  the  Holy  Spirit  provided  for  the  office  of 
"pastor"  as  well  as  of  "teacher;"  but  somehow  the  former  is  no 
longer  of  much  account.  And  what  is  most  lamentable  indeed,  is 
the  indifference  on  this  subject  alike  among  the  clergy  and  laity. 
The  grumbling  of  people  about  their  minister  not  coming  to  see 
them,  is  largely  fictitious.  Often  it  is  only  a  safety  valve  to  let  off  a 
little  extra  bile.  For  when  he  comes  they  don't  know  what  to  do 
with  him,  nor  he  with  them.  Both  feel  alike  uncomfortable ;  and  both 
arc  glad  when  the  interview  is  ended.  The  people  say,  "Our  preacher 
is  very  stiff;"  the  preacher  says,  "  My  people  are  very  reserved." 
The  care  for  souls — "  die  Seelsorge,"  of  which  so  much  is  said  in 
our  "Pastoral  Theology,"  has  its  place  in  our  books,  scarcely  any- 
where else.  Since  the  practical  dropping  out  of  our  Confession  of 
the  XI.  Article,  pastoral  theology  has  little  pith  or  point  in  it.  It  is 
eviscerated  of  its  vitality.  As  a  direct  result,  much  of  our  preach- 
ing is  aimless.  We  draw  the  bow  at  a  venture.  Unacquainted  with 
the  real  spiritual  condition  of  our  flock,  we  deal  in  "glittering  gen- 
eralities;" and  those  that  come  with  heavy  burdens  to  our  sanctua- 
ries, carry  them  away  again  with  the  additional  and  crushing  one  of 
grievous  disappointment. 

It  would  be  a  bold  venture  here  to  say  that  the  practice  of  private 
confession  and  absolution  will  likely  become  popular  again,  or  be  in 
any  general  sense  restored  in  the  Church.     It  is  indeed  true  that  we 


378  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

live  in  an  age  of  revolutions,  of  short,  sharp  turns.  And  it  is  par- 
ticularly dangerous,  now-a-days,  to  prophesy  before  the  facts  have 
transpired.  Emphatically  are  these  the  times  in  which  no  one  can 
say  what  a  single  day  may  bring  forth.  But  this  I  most  confidently 
assert,  that  we  have  gained  nothing  but  lost  much,  by  suffering  this 
Article  to  become  practically  obsolete  in  our  Church. 


ARTICLE  XII. 


REPENTANCE. 

By  S.  W.  HARKEY,  D.  D. 


"Of  Repentance  it  is  taught,  that  those  who  have  sinned  after  Baptism,  may 
at  all  times  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins,  if  they  come  to  repentance  ;  and  to  them 
absolution  should  not  be  denied  by  the  Church.  And  true  Repentance  pro- 
perly is  sorrow  for  sin,  and  to  be  alarmed  on  account  of  it,  and  yet  with  this 
to  believe  the  Gospel  and  absolution,  that  sins  are  forgiven,  and  grace  obtained 
through  Christ,  which  faith  again  comforts  the  heart  and  restores  it  to  peace. 
Afterwards  such  persons  must  abstain  from  all  sin,  and  reformation  of  life  must 
follow,  which  are  the  fruits  of  Repentance,  as  John  says,  Matt.  iii.  8,  '  Bring 
forth  therefore  fruits  meet  for  repentance.' 

"  Here  they  are  rejected  who  teach  that  such  as  have  once  become  pious  can- 
not fall  again. 

"  On  the  other  hand  the  Novatians  are  also  condemned,  who  denied  absolution 
to  such  as  had  sinned  after  Baptism. 

"  Those  also  are  rejected  who  teach  that  we  do  not  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins- 
by  faith  in  Christ,  but  by  the  merit  of  our  own  good  works." 

CHRISTIANITY  in  its  relation  to  man,  is  both  external  and  in- 
ternal— objective  and  subjective.  It  contains  a  system  of  truth, 
not  of  man's  own  discovery,  but  revealed  by  God.  "  For  the  pro- 
phecy came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man :  but  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  2  Pet.  i.  21.  It  is 
addressed  to  his  reason  and  consciousness,  and  he  is  expected  to  re- 
ceive it,  to  seek  to  understand  it  correctly,  to  believe  it,  and  to  prac- 
tice its  precepts  and  duties  in  his  life.  It  is  to  him  a  divine  rule  of 
life.  All  its  institutions  too,  as  the  Church,  with  her  Gospel,  min- 
istry, worship,  sacraments,  and  benevolent  operations,  belong  to  the 
external  or  objective  of  Christianity. 

But  such  external  religion  must  have  its  counterpart  in  the  soul 
of  the  believer.     There  must  be  a  work  of  grace  in  the  heart,  con-' 

379 


380  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

sisting  of  knowledge  of  sin,  repentance  of,sin,  faith  in  Christ,  love  to 
God  and  man,  holiness,  and  an  internal  life  of  piety.  "The  king- 
dom of  God  is  within  you,"  Luke  xvii.  21  ;  "And  be  renewed  in  the 
spirit  of  your  mind;  and  that  ye  put  on  the  new  man,  which  after 
God  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness,"  Eph.  iv.  23,  24. 
"  Therefore,  if  any  man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature:  old  things 
are  passed  away;  behold,  all  things  are  become  new,"  2  Cor.  v.  17. 

An  external  religion  may  exist  without  the  internal ;  and  then  it 
is  a  body  without  a  soul,  a  form  without  a  life,  a  system  of  dry,  dead 
dogmas  and  ceremonies,  which  can  accomplish  nothing  for  the  en- 
lightment  and  salvation  of  the  race.  This  was  the  great  error  of  the 
Romish  church.  She  had  an  immense  and  most  powerful  hierarchy, 
a  grand  system  of  doctrines,  rules,  forms,  and  ceremonies — a  mighty 
politico-religious  establishment,  which  controlled  men's  hearts 
and  consciences,  making  most  abject  slaves  of  them,  and  ruling 
the  world  with  a  rod  of  iron.  But  true  spiritual  life — the  life  of 
repentance,  faith,  love,  holiness,  and  piety  in  the  soul — was  wholly 
lost  in  the  Church  as  such.  Only  in  individual  cases,  and  in  spite 
of  the  Church  and  her  teaching  and  influence,  do  we  find  any  trace 
of  it.  For  more  than  a  thousand  years  previous  to  the  Reforma- 
tion, the  true  doctrine  of  repentance,  faith,  and  justification  had  been 
utterly  perverted  by  Rome.  She  had  rejected  almost  the  whole 
system  oi  Evaiigelical  CJiristianify,  taught  by  Christ  and  the  Apos- 
tles, and  had  substituted  in  its  place  a  most  burdensome  religion  of 
works,  penance,  fasts,  confessions,  church  ceremonies,  pilgrimages, 
indulgences,  and  the  like.  Man  was  not  to  be  saved  by  "  Repen- 
tance toward  God,  and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  Acts 
XX.  21,  but  really  without  Christ,  by  his  own  works  and  merits. 
His  sins  were  to  be  washed  away  by  Baptism,  as  a  mere  work,  ex 
opere  operato ;  and  if  he  sinned  again  afterwards,  he  must  make 
atonement  for  himself  by  a  series  of  mortifications  of  the  flesh  in 
church-imposed  penances,  and  by  confessing  to  the  priest  and  ob- 
taining his  ghostly  absolution.  Christ  and  his  precious  salvation 
were  covered  up — yea,  buried  out  of  sight,  beneath  a  great  mass  of 
human  corruptions  and  inventions. 

"The  vital  doctrines  of  Christianity,"  says  D'Aubigne,  "had 
almost  entirely  disappeared,  and  with  them  the  life  and  light  that 
constitute  the  essence  of  the  religion  of  God.  The  spiritual  strength 
of  the   Church  was  gone.     She  lay  an  exhausted,  enfeebled,  and 


REPENTANCE,  38 1 

almost  lifeless  body,  extended  over  that  part  of  the  world  which  the 
Roman  empire  had  occupied."* 

And  again : 

"  It  was  especially  by  the  system  of  penance,  which  flowed  im- 
mediately from  Pelagianism,  that  Christianity  was  perverted.  At 
first,  penance  had  consisted  in  certain  public  expressions  of  repent- 
ance, required  by  the  Church  from  those  who  had  been  excluded 
on  account  of  scandals,  and  who  desired  to  be  received  again  into 
its  bosom. 

"But  by  degrees  penance  was  extended  to  every  sin,  even  to  the 
most  secret,  and  was  considered  as  a  sort  of  punishment  to  which  it 
was  necessary  to  submit,  in  order  to  obtain  the  forgiveness  of  God 
through  the  priest's  absolution. 

"  Ecclesiastical  penance  was  thus  confounded  with  Christian 
repentance,  without  which  there  can  be  neither  justification  nor  sanc- 
tification.  Instead  of  looking  to  Christ  alone  for  pardon  through 
faith,  it  was  sought  for  principally  in  the  Church  through  penitential 
works. 

"  Great  importance  was  soon  attached  to  external  marks  of  repent- 
ance— to  tears,  fasting,  and  mortification  of  the  flesh;  and  the  in- 
ward regeneration  of  the  heart,  which  alone  constitutes  a  real  con- 
version, was  forgotten. 

"  The  penitential  works,  thus  substituted  for  the  salvation  of  God, 
were  multiplied  in  the  Church  from  Tertullian  (born  A.  D.  160,) 
down  to  the  thirteenth  century.  Men  were  required  to  fast,  to  go 
barefoot,  to  wear  no  linen,  etc.;  to  quit  their  homes  and  their  native 
land  for  distant  countries;  or  to  renounce  the  world  and  embrace  a 
monastic  life. 

"  In  the  eleventh  century  voluntary  flagellations  were  superadded 
to  the.se  practices:  somewhat  later  they  became  quite  a  mania  in 
Italy,  which  was  then  in  a  very  disturbed  state.  Nobles  and  peasants, 
old  and  young,  even  children  of  five  years  of  age,  whose  only  cover- 
ing was  a  cloth  tied  round  the  middle,  went  in  pairs,  by  hundreds, 
thousands,  and  tens  of  thousands,  through  the  towns  and  villages, 
visituig  the  churches  in  the  depth  of  winter.  Armed  with  scourges, 
they  flogged  each  other  without  pity,  and  the  streets  resounded  with 
cries  and  groans,  that  drew  tears  from  all  who  heard  them."t 

*  History  of  the  Reformation,  Vol.  I.,  p.  68. 

t  History  of  the  Reformation,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  54,  55. 


382  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

What  a  terrible  showing  is  not  this  of  what  must  follow  when  the 
true  doctrine  of  repentance  and  faith  is  lost  or  perverted!  So  even 
Luther,  when  a  young  man,  though  then  already  one  of  the  best 
educated  and  most  intelligent  of  his  day,  was  in  utter  darkness  as  to 
the  way  of  salvation,  when  distressed  and  alarmed  on  account  of 
sin.  He  knew  not  that  he  could  come  to  Christ  for  pardon,  nor 
how  to  come.  He  commenced  to  torment  himself  by  penance — to 
labor,  fast,  and  pray,  after  the  papal  plan,  and  do  all  sorts  of  works 
— he  entered  a  monastery  to  be  shut  out  from  the  world  entirely, 
and  most  zealously  and  conscientiously  devoted  himself  to  the  ob- 
servance of  all  its  rules  and  duties — sometimes  for  many  days  eating 
almost  nothing,  lying  on  the  hard  floor  of  his  cell,  agonizing  and 
struggling  day  and  night  to  obtain  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  until 
he  came  near  destroying  his  own  life,  all  to  no  purpose,  for  his  soul 
could  find  in  this  way  no  peace.  What  a  grand  deliverance  did 
God  grant  him,  when  afterwards  he  was  led  to  trust  in  Christ  by 
faith,  and,  "being  justified  by  faith,  to  have  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  Many  years  afterwards,  when  he  had  come 
clearly  and  fully  into  the  light  on  this  great  subject,  he  wrote  as 
follows : 

"  It  was  impossible  that  the  Papists  should  teach  correctly  con- 
cerning repentance,  since  they  did  not  understand  the  nature  of  sin 
correctly.  They  were  in  error  in  regard  to  original  sin,  maintain- 
ing that  man's  natural  powers  remained  entire  and  uncorrupted, 
that  his  reason  could  yet  teach  correctly  and  his  will  act  right,  and 
that  God  does  certainly  give  his  grace,  when  man,  in  the  use  of  his 
free  will,  does  as  well  as  he  can. 

"  From  this  it  must  follow  that  they  would  repent  only  of  actual 
sins,  as  willful  wicked  thoughts  (for  bad  emotions,  lusts,  and  desires, 
were  no  sins),  wicked  language  and  actions,  which  the  free  will 
might  have  omitted. 

"And  to  such  repentance  they  reckoned  three  parts,  namely, 
sorrow,  confession,  and  satisfaction,  with  the  comfort  and  assurance 
that  any  person  who  did  properly  have  sorrow,  and  confess,  and 
make  satisfaction,  had  thereby  merited  pardon  and  paid  God  the 
debt  of  sin  I  Accordingly  they  directed  the  people,  when  alarmed 
on  account  of  sin,  to  trust  in  their  own  works.  *  *  In  all  this 
there  was  no  Christ,  nor  a  thought  of  faith  in  him;  but  men  hoped 
to  overcome  and  destroy  sins  in  the  sight  of  God,  by  their  own 


,  REPENTANCE.  383 

works ;  under  such  impressions  we  too  became  monks  and  priests, 
that  we  might  set  ourselves  against  sins!"* 

And  Melanchthon  also  testifies  to  the  utterly  erroneous  teaching 
of  the  Papists  on  this  subject.     He  says : 

"All  honorable,  honest  men  of  intelligence,  of  high  and  low  station, 
even  the  Theologians  themselves,  will  have  to  confess,  as  also  our 
enemies,  convinced  beyond  doubt,  in  their  own  hearts,  that  formerly, 
before  Dr.  Luther  wrote,  there  existed  only  the  most  dark  and  con- 
fused writing  and  books  on  the  subject  of  Repentance.  One  may 
see  with  the  sententiaries  what  innumerable  useless  questions  there 
are,  which  as  yet  no  Theologians  even  have  been  able  sufficiently 
to  explain.  Much  less  could  the  people  get  any  just  conception  of 
the  subject  out  of  their  sermons  and  books,  or  see  which  certainly 
is  specially  necessary  in  true  repentance,  how  or  in  what  way  the 
heart  and  conscience  must  seek  for  rest  and  peace.  And  even  now 
we  may  challenge  any  one  of  them  to  come  forth,  who  could  out  of 
their  books,  instruct  a  single  soul  to  understand  and  know  with 
certainty  when  sins  are  forgiven!  Gracious  God!  What  blindness 
do  we  see  here!  How  they  know  just  nothing  at  all  about  the  sub- 
ject !    How  are  their  writings  utter  night  and  darkness !  "  f 

And  then  he  proceeds  to  point  out  some  of  these  curious  ques- 
tions and  errors,  a  few  of  which  we  may  give  in  our  own  language. 
They  ask  whether  forgiveness  of  sins  takes  place  in  attrition  or 
contrition?  And  if  forgiveness  is  granted  on  account  of  sorrow  or 
contrition,  why  then  is  absolution  necessary?  And  if  sins  are 
already  pardoned,  where  then  is  the  necessity  of  the  Power  of  the 
Keys?  They  say  that  God  must  forgive  us  our  sins,  if  we  perform 
good  works,  without  grace — that  we  merit  grace  by  attrition  or 
sorrow — that  if  we  hate  sins,  and  rebuke  them  in  ourselves,  this  is 
sufficient  to  blot  them  out — that  it  is  on  account  of  sorrow  that  we 
obtain  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  not  on  account  of  faith  in  Christ — 
that  in  confession  the  actual  enumeration  of  all  our  sins  is  necessary, 
and  none  can  be  forgiven  but  those  that  are  thus  enumerated — that 
in  the  sacrament  of  Penance  we  obtain  grace  ex  opere  operato,  even 
when  the  heart  is  hot  in  the  work,  and  when  there  is  no  faith  in 
Christ — that  in  the  exercise  of  the  Power  of  the  Keys  souls  may  be 
redeemed  from   Purgatory  by  means  of  Indulgences — and   much 


*Smalcald  Articles,  p.  378.  f  Apology,  p.  168. 


384  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

more  of  such  miserable  stuff.  From  this  we  may  see  how  utterly 
lost  was  all  true  evangelical  piety  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  at  the 
commencement  of  the  Reformation. 

Under  these  circumstances  our  Reformers  were  required  to  state 
the  real  truth  of  God  on  this  subject,  which  they  seek  to  do  in  few 
words,  in  the  Twelfth  Article  of  the  Confession. 

We  must  consider  well  the  position  and  object  of  the  authors  of 
the  Confession,  must  place  oiu'selves,  as  nearly  as  possible,  in  their 
circumstances,  to  understand  them  correctly.  They  were  not  rcvo- 
Ititionists,  pulling  down  and  destroying  everything  before  them, 
making  "havoc  of  the  Church,"  by  uprooting  "  the  wheat  with  the 
tares  ;"  but  they  were  true  Reformers,  most  conscientiously  anxious 
not  to  do  injustice  to  Rome — not  to  find  errors  where  there  were 
none — but  to  retain  everything  that  was  true  and  good  in  Catholi- 
cism, and  to  point  out  and  change  only  that  which  was  false  and  evil. 
This  will  account,  in  part  at  least,  for  the  language  used  in  our  Arti- 
cle, and  the  manner  in  which  they  present  the  subject.  Protestant 
writers  of  the  present  day  would  scarcely  think  of  beginning  an 
Article  on  Repentance  by  referring  first  to  those  "  who  have  sinned 
after  Baptism."  Repentance  must  be  the  same  for  all  men,  as  well 
those  who  have  not  been  baptized  as  those  who  have.  In  all  cases 
it  must  consist  of  the  two  parts,  sorrow  for  sin  and  faith  in  Christ, 
as  they  have  it,  and  it  is  equally  necessary  for  all  men.  But  at  the 
time  of  the  Reformation,  especially  among  Romanists,  Repentance, 
as  far  as  they  had  any  ideas  on  the  subject  at  all,  was  associated 
with  sins  committed  after  Baptism,  confessions  to  the  priest  and 
absolution.  To  this  state  of  things  the  shape  of  the  Article  is  un- 
doubtedly due. 

A  brief  analysis  of  the  doctrines  taught  or  implied  in  the  Article 
gives  us  the  following  result: 

I.  TJiat  persons  may  sin  or  fall  again  after  Baptism.  "  Quod  lap- 
sis  post  baptismum,"  that  such  as  have  fallen  after  Baptism,  even 
those  who  have  been  justified,  may  again  lose  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
hence  the  Confessors  "condemn  those  who  deny  that  men  once  jus- 
tified can  lose  the  Spirit  of  God." 

It  is,  of  course,  implied  that  sins  are  forgiven  in  true  Baptism, 
whether  the  subject  be  an  infant  or  an  adult  person.  And  yet, 
whatever  be  the  effects  or  benefits  of  Baptism,  whatever  change  the 
Spirit  of  God  may  produce  in  the  soul,  through  it  as  a  means,  and 


REPENTANCE.  385 

in  the  condition  and  relations  of  the  subject,  they  are  not  such  that 
he  may  not  again  sin  or  fall  from  the  new  state  into  which  it  placed 
him. 

2.  But  the  condition  of  such  fallen  ones,  though  sad  and  greatly  to 
be  deplored,  is  not  bitterly  hopeless,  not  beyond  the  reach  of  mercy  and 
recoz'cry.  Like  other  sinners  they  "  may  at  all  times  obtain  forgive- 
ness of  their  sins,  if  they  repent."  Not  by  a  system  of  penance  or 
self-inflicted  tortures  can  they  be  restored,  not  by  means  of  indul- 
gences, meritorious  works,  self-denials  and  sufferings,  as  the  Roman- 
ists taught;  but  by  Repentance.  Whenever  they  truly  repent  their 
sins  will  be  forgiven  them.  But  without  true  repentance  there  is  no 
pardon  and  no  salvation. 

3.  That  as  God  pardons  sttcli  fallen  ones  ivJien  they  trtdy  repent, 
"  the  Church  should  not  refuse  to  grant  absoliitio7i  nnto  thejn.'"  As 
they  have  obtained  the  divine  forgiveness,  the  Church  ought  also  to 
grant  its  forgiveness,  and  gladly  restore  these  returning  prodigals 
to  membership  and  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  the  rights  and  privi- 
leges of  members. 

4.  But  true  Repentance,  in  its  full  and  complete  sense,  properly  con- 
sists of  tzvo  parts.  The  one  is  sorrozv  for  sin,  and  the  other  is  faith 
in  Christ.  And,  though  these  two  parts  may  be  considered  sepa- 
rately, yet  they  are  so  united  as  to  constitute  one  complete  whole. 
Neither  can  be  fully  presented,  understood  or  attained  without  the 
other.  The  one  wounds,  the  other  heals ;  the  one  alarms  and  con- 
demns, the  other  pardons  and  brings  peace  again  to  the  soul ;  the 
one  points  to  Sinai,  the  other  to  Calvary. 

5.  That  good  works  and  reformation  of  life  must  follow,  if  our  re- 
pentance be  gemnne  ;  for  these  are  its  legitimate  fruits.  No  person 
who  has  truly  repented  of  sin  can  continue  still  to  live  in  sin,  for 
this  would  be  a  contradiction.  He  cannot  be  sorry  for  and  hate 
that  which  he  still  loves  and  practices.  On  the  contrary,  he  nmst 
forsake  all  sin,  lead  a  pious  and  holy  life,  and  "  perform  all  manner 
of  good  works." 

6.  Holding  these  doctrines,  the  Reformers,  in  our  Article,  reject 
the  four  following  errors  : 

First,  That  those  who  have  once  become  pious  may  not  again 
lose  the  Spirit  of  God  and  fall  into  sin. 

Second,  That  men  may  attain  to  such  perfection  in  this  life  that 
they  cannot  sin  any  more. 


386  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Third,  That  those  who  have  fallen  into  sin  after  Baptism,  should 
not  be  restored  again  by  the  Church,  even  when  they  truly  repent. 

Fourth,  That  justification  or  pardon  of  sin  is  not  obtained  by  faith 
in  Christ,  but  by  our  own  merits  and  good  works. 

These  were  regarded  as  serious  errors  by  our  Confessors,  and  are 
therefore  here  condemned  and  rejected. 

So  much  by  way  of  an  analysis  of  our  Article.  It  is  plain  that  a 
full  development  of  all  these  points  would  require  a  volume  and  not 
a  brief  lecture.  The  field  is  quite  too  vast,  and  we  must  therefore 
pass  over  some  points  very  hastily  or  not  touch  them  at  all,  and 
give  our  attention  mainly  to  one  or  two. 

I.  Repentance  and  Remission  of  Sins  as  Connected  with 

Baptism. 

The  Confessors  do  not  state  in  this  Twelfth  Article  that  they  hold 
that  sins  are  forgiven  in  Baptism,  and  that  the  baptized  person  is  in 
a  state  of  grace  or  favor  with  God:  but  this  is  taught  by  implication. 
Hence  sinning  after  Baptism  is  represented  as  "  losing  the  Spirit  of 
God,"  and  falling  from  grace,  and  the  restoration  of  such  as  requir- 
ing special  repentance  and  absolution,  that  is,  pardon  and  re- 
admission  by  the  Church.  It  is,  however,  not  difficult  to  ascertain 
what  they  did  hold  on  this  subject  by  referring  to  other  articles  of 
the  Confession  and  other  sources  of  information.  In  Article  Two, 
which  treats  of  Original  Sin,  they  say: 

"  This  disease,  or  natural  depravity,  is  truly  sin,  condemning  and 
bringing  eternal  death  upon  all  that  are  not  born  again  by  baptism 
and  the  Holy  Spirit." 

tiere  the  ncza  birtJi  is  "  by  baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit : "  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  the  agent  and  baptism  as  the  means.  The  condition 
and  the  relations  of  the  baptized  person  are  so  changed  that  it  may 
be  said  of  him,  he  is  "born  again,"  and  is  no  longer  condemned  to 
eternal  death  on  account  of  original  sin. 

In  the  Ninth  Article,  which  treats  of  Baptism,  they  say: 

"  Of  Baptism,  it  is  taught  that  it  is  necessary  {ad  salntem,  adds  the 
Latin),  and  that  through  it  grace  is  offered,  and  that  children  also 
ought  to  be  baptized,  who  by  such  baptism  are  dedicated  to  God, 
and  received  into  his  favor." 

In  Liithcrs  Smaller  CatecJnsm  we  have  several  important  ques- 
tions and  answers  on  this  subject,  as  follows  : 


REPENTANCE.  387 

Question:  "What  are  the  gifts  or  benefits  of  baptism?" 
Answer :  It  worketh   forgiveness  of  sins,  deh'vers  from  death  and 
the  devil,  and  confers  everlasting  salvation  on  all  who  believe,  as 
the  word  and  promise  of  God  declare." 

Question:  "  How  can  water  produce  such  great  effects?" 
Answer :  "  It  is  not  the  water  that  produces  them,  but  the  ivord 
of  God  which  accompanies  and  is  connected  with  the  water,  and  our 
faith,  which  relies  on  the  word  of  God  connected  with  the  water. 
For  the  water  without  the  word  of  God  is  simply  water,  and  no 
baptism.  But  when  connected  with  the  word  of  God,  it  is  a  baptism, 
that  is,  a  gracious  water  of  life,  and  a  '  washing  of  regeneration '  in 
the  Holy  Ghost'  " 

From  this,  and  much  more  that  might  be  cited,  it  is  clear  enough 
that  the  Confessors  held  and  taught  that  sins  are  forgiven,  and  grace 
is  bestowed,  in  the  administration  of  the  sacrament  of  Baptism.  I 
suppose  that  this  point  will  not  be  disputed. 

But  what  is  true  Baptism  as  they  held  it  ?  I  answer  that  they 
regarded  the  four  following  things  as  necessary  to  constitute  true 
Baptism  :  i.  TJic  divine  agency :  the  presence  and  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  2.  The  human  agency :  The  use  of  water  applied  to  the 
subject  in  a  proper  manner  by  an  authorized  person.  3.  TJie  tuord 
of  God,  "  which  accompanies  and  is  connected  with  the  ivater." 
The  act  must  not  only  be  performed  "  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  but  with  prayer,  and  by 
the  authority  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  obedience  to  his  ex- 
press command.  4.  "  Our  faith,  confiding  in  this  word  of  God  in 
the  use  of  baptismal  water."  If  any  one  of  these  be  absent,  it  is  no 
Baptism.  If  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  divine  agency,  be  absent,  or  there 
be  no  water  used  in  a  proper  way,  or  no  word  or  command  of  God, 
or  there  be  no  true  faith  in  the  administrator,  or  the  subject,  or  the 
persons  concerned  and  present,  it  is  no  baptism.  But  having  all 
these  present,  then,  according  to  the  teaching  of  our  Confessors,  the 
subject  is  born  again  by  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  or,  in  the 
language  of  Chri.st  to  Nicodemus,  "  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit." 
Then  such  baptized  person,  whether  infant  or  adult,  is  delivered 
from  condemnation  and  eternal  death.  To  him  the  grace  of  God  is 
offered,  as  he  is  offered  and  dedicated  to  God.  He  is  received  into 
the  divine  favor.  The  Holy  Spirit,  through  this  ordinance  as  a 
means,  and  because  of"  faith  confiding  in  the  word  of  God,"  "  causes 


388  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  forgiveness  of  sin,  delivers  from  death  and  the  devil,  and  gives 
everlasting  salvation  to  those  that  believe."  Such  a  baptized 
person  must  now  be  declared  pardoned,  free  from  sin,  a  child  of 
God  and  an  heir  of  heaven. 

This  seems  to  be  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Lutheran  Church  on 
this  subject.  It  is  no  "baptismal  regeneration"  ex  opere  operate,  as 
the  Papists  held,  and  still  hold  it.  It  is  no  baptismal  or  water  re- 
generation at  all ;  for  "  it  is  not  the  water  that  does  it."  But  it  is 
Holy  Ghost  regeneration,  through  Baptism,  the  word  of  God,  and 
prayer,  as  means.  It  will  scarcely  be  denied  that  an  infant,  being 
thus  baptized,  may  be  regenerated  by  the  Holy  Ghost  without  re- 
pentance and  faith  on  its  ozun  part,  it  being,  properly  speaking,  capa- 
ble of  neither;  but  adult  persons  are  proper  subjects  for  Baptism 
only  when  they  repent  and  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
"  Not  by  works  of  righteousness  which  we  have  done,  but  according 
to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by  the  washing  of  regeneration,  and  the 
renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Tit.  iii.  5.  Of  course  we  can  speak 
of  infant  regeneration,  in  any  case,  only  in  the  limited  specific  sense 
of  the  word  as  denoting  alone  the  divine  agency — the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  the  subject  being  wholly  passive.  It  is  clear  also  that 
the  Scriptures  do  connect  pardon  of  sin  and  salvation  with  Baptism. 
"  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  be- 
lieveth  not,  shall  be  damned,"  Mark  xvi.  16.  On  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost, when  the  awakened  multitudes  asked,  "  Men  and  brethren, 
what  shall  we  do?  "  Peter  replied  :  "  Repent  and  be  baptized  every 
one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Acts  ii.  38.  And  the 
Lord  sent  the  devout  Ananias  to  the  now  penitent  Saul  of  Tarsus, 
to  say  to  him,  among  other  things:  "And  now  why  tarriest  thou  ? 
arise  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name 
of  the  Lord,"  Acts  xxii.  16.  From  these  and  other  passages  of 
God's  word  we  see  that  faith  and  Baptism  secure  salvation — that 
men  are  born  again  "  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit  " — that  they  must 
repctit  and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  "for  the  remission 
of  sins'' — that  by  Baptism  Paul  was  to  "wash  aivay  his  sins" — that 
it  is  "'  tJie  ivashing  (or  bath)  of  regeneration,  and  the  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  It  is  a  lame  subterfuge  to  say,  as  Dr.  Macknight  has 
done  and  thousands  of  others  with  him,  that  in  all  these  passages  it 
does  not  mean  that  "  any  change  in  the  nature  of  the  baptized  per- 


REPENTANCE.  389 

son  is  produced  by  Baptism,  but  it  is  an  emblem  of  the  purification 
of  his  soul  from  sin."*  Of  course  Baptism  itself  does  not  produce 
the  change — "  it  is  not  the  water  that  produces  it,"  we  must  say 
again  with  Luther ;  but  it  is  "  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  "  or 
"  the  renewing"  (the  change),  "is  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Though  this  doctrine  has  been  greatly  misunderstood  and  per- 
verted, especially  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  its  history  is  interesting 
in  a  high  degree,  and  sheds  much  light  upon  the  subject.  We  are 
told  that  it  was  customary  among  the  Jewish  doctors,  "  when  they 
admitted  a  proselyte  into  their  Church  by  Baptism,  always  to  speak 
of  him  as  one  born  againy  The  manner  of  speaking  and  teaching 
of  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  we  have  just  seen.  And  as  far  back  as 
the  second  century,  Mosheim  (Vol  I,  p.  69)  tells  us,  "  that  adult  per- 
sons were  prepared  for  Baptism  by  abstinence,  prayer  and  other 
pious  exercises" — "  that  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  was  administered 
publicly  twice  every  year,"  namely,  at  Easter  and  Pentecost — "  that 
the  persons  that  were  to  be  baptized  repeated  the  Creed,  confessed 
and  renounced  their  sins,  and  particularly  the  devil  and  his  pompous 
allurements  " — "  that  after  Baptism,  they  received  the  sign  of  the 
Cross,  were  anointed,  and,  by  prayers  and  the  imposition  of  hands, 
were  solemnly  recommended  to  the  mercy  of  God,  and  dedicated  to 
his  service  ;  in  consequence  of  which  they  received  milk  and  honey, 
which  concluded  the  ceremony."  All  this  was  evidently  intended 
to  convey  the  idea  that  these  baptized  persons  were  now  "  new 
creatures,"  cleansed  from  sin  and  received  into  favor  with  God. 
In  the  third  century,  says  the  same  author  (Vol.  I.,  p.  91,  92): 
"There  were  twice  a  year  stated  times,  when  baptism  was  admin- 
istered to  such  as,  after  a  long  course  of  trial  and  preparation,  offered 
themselves  as  candidates  for  the  profession  of  Christianity.  *  * 
The  remission  of  sin  was  thought  to  be  its  immediate  and  happy 
fruit ;  while  the  bishop,  by  prayer  and  the  imposition  of  hands,  was 
supposed  to  confer  those  sanctifying  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which 
are  necessary  to  a  life  of  righteousness  and  virtue.  *  *  After  the 
administration  of  baptism,  the  candidates  returned  home,  adorned 
with  crowns,  and  arrayed  in  white  garments,  as  sacred  emblems — 
the  former,  of  their  victory  over  sin  and  the  world  ;  and  the  latter,  of 
their  inward  purity  and  innocence.     *     *     it  ^^g  ^  custom  with 

*See  Macknight  on  the  Epistles,  Titus  iii.  5, 
26 


390  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

many  in  this  century,  to  put  off  their  baptism  to  the  last  hour,  that 
thus,  immediately  after  receiving  by  this  rite  the  remission  of  their 
sins,  they  might  ascend,  pure  and  spotless,  to  the  mansions  of  life 
and  immortality." 

Thus  Constantine  the  Great  lived  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century 
without  baptism,  after  he  professed  to  have  become  a  believer  in 
Christianity,  and  received  the  ordinance  only  a  few  days  before  his 
death. 

Thus  gradually  men  fell  into  the  error  of  changing  this  sacrament 
from  a  means  into  an  efficient  cause.  People  were  no  longer  "  born 
of  water  and  of  the  Spirit;"  but  the  water  itself  did  the  work.  All 
baptized  persons  were  regenerated  and  pardoned — washed  and  puri- 
fied from  all  sin — by  the  efficient  working  of  the  ordinance  itself 
And  this  error,  canonized  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  has  come  down 
to  our  own  times.  No  necessity  for  repentance,  faith,  and  a  regen- 
eration of  the  soul  by  the  Spirit  of  God — Baptism  has  done  it  all. 

The  only  trouble  was  in  regard  to  sins  committed  after  Baptism, 
What  was  to  be  done  with  these  ?  Could  persons  be  baptized  again 
to  obtain  the  remission  of  their  sins  committed  after  Baptism?  Cer- 
tainly not.  The  Novatians  (A.  D.  250),  referred  to  in  our  Article, 
would  not  admit  those  into  the  Church  again,  who  had  fallen  into 
sin  after  Baptism,  even  if  they  did  repent.  Novatus  held  that  the 
Church  was  a  society  of  the/z/rr — "  Cathari" — and  as  sin  after  Bap- 
tism made  men  impure,  they  could  not  be  re-admitted.  But  the 
Western  or  Latin  Church  took  the  opposite  view  of  the  case,  and  a 
large  council  resolved  "  That  they  should  be  treated  and  healed  with 
the  remedies  of  repentance" — this  afterwards  med^nt penance,  and  is 
the  remedy  to  this  day  in  the  Catholic  Church. 

Neander  gives  the  following  interesting  account  of  this  subject: 

"  The  controversy  with  the  Novatian  party  turned  upon  two  gen- 
eral points ;  one  relating  to  the  principles  of  penitence,  the  other  to 
the  question,  what  constitutes  the  idea  and  essence  of  a  true  Church  ? 
In  respect  to  the  first  point  of  dispute,  Novatian  had  been  often  un- 
justly accused  of  maintaining  that  no  person,  having  once  violated 
his  baptismal  vows,  can  ever  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins — that  he  is 
certainly  exposed  to  eternal  damnation.  But,  first,  Novatian  by  no 
means  maintained  that  a  Christian  is  a  perfect  saint ;  he  spoke  here 
not  of  all  sins,  but  assuming  as  valid  the  distinction  between 
"  peccata  venialia  "  and  "  peccata  mortalia,"  he  was  treating  only  of 


REPENTANCE.  3QI 

the  latter.  Again,  he  was  speaking  by  no  means  o{  the  divine  for- 
givetiess  of  sin,  but  only  of  the  Church  tribunal — of  absolution  by 
the  Church.  The  Church,  he  would  say,  has  no  right  to  grant  abso- 
lution to  a  person  who,  by  mortal  sin,  has  trifled  away  the  pardon 
obtained  for  him  by  Christ,  and  appropriated  to  him  by  Baptism. 
No  counsel  of  God,  touching  the  case  of  such  persons,  has  been 
revealed  ;  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin  which  the  Gospel  assures  us  of, 
relates  only  to  sins  committed  before  Baptism.  We  ought,  doubt- 
less, to  be  interested  for  such  fallen  brethren  ;  but  nothing  can  be 
done  for  them  save  to  exhort  them  to  repent,  and  to  commend  them 
to  God's  mercy. 

With  regard  to  the  second  part  of  the  controversy,  the  idea  of  the 
Church,  Novatian  maintained  that  one  of  the  essential  marks  of  a 
true  Church  being  purity  and  holiness,  every  Church  which,  neglect- 
ing the  exercise  of  discipline,  tolerated  in  its  bosom,  or  re-admitted 
to  its  communion,  such  persons  as,  by  gross  sins,  have  broken  their 
baptismal  vow,  ceases  by  that  very  act  to  be  a  true  Christian  Church, 
and  forfeits  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of  such  a  Church."* 

Thus  far  Neander.     Pacianus  puts  it  short,  thus: 

"Quod  mortale  peccatum  ecclesia  donare  non  possit,  immo  quod 
ipsa  pereat  recipiendo  peccantes." 

With  such  facts  as  these  before  them  in  the  history  of  the  Church, 
and  fully  acquainted  with  the  theology  of  the  times,  and  the  modes 
of  thought  and  expression  customary  among  men  of  that  day,  the 
authors  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  as  we  have  already  stated  in 
our  analysis  of  this  Twelfth  Article,  held  that  in  true  Baptism,  both 
of  adults  and  infants,  God  does  forgive  their  sins  and  receive  them 
into  his  favor — that  is  the  teaching  of  God's  word — that  they  are 
"  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit."  And  as  infant  Baptism  was 
universally  practiced  in  the  Catholic  Church,  there  was  no  repent- 
ance necessary  or  possible  in  their  case,  as  a  preparation  for  Bap- 
tism or  pardon  of  sin.  But  they  might  sin  after  Baptism,  and  could 
not  be  baptized  again  for  pardon,  or  as  often  as  they  might  sin,  and 
hence  they  commence  their  article  as  they  do:  "  Of  Repentance  it 
is  taught,  that  those  who  have  sinned  after  Baptism,  may  at  all 
times  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins  "  (not  by  being  baptized  again  or 
often,  but)  "  if  they  come  to   repentance."     Of  course  this   implies 


Hist.  Christ.  Religion  and  Church,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  243-246. 


392  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

equally  that  all  men,  adults,  who  have  not  been  baptized,  must 
repent  and  believe,  both  to  be  fit  subjects  for  Baptism,  and  to  obtain 
pardon  of  sin, 

II.  Repentance,  Its  Nature  and  Necessity. 

In  the  brief  time  allowed  us  in  this  lecture,  we  cannot  now 
attempt  a  full  discussion  of  the  great  subject  of  Repentance,  as  held 
and  taught  by  Lutherans.  We  must  content  ourselves  with  a  few 
hasty  remarks. 

Two  Greek  words  are  used  in  the  Scriptures  which  are  uniformly 
translated  into  English  by  the  one  word  Repentance,  which  yet 
seem  to  have  different  meanings.  They  are  fiz-avaia  and  firraiieXeia, 
from  the  verbs  Mfraiww  and  UeTai^dlofmi.  It  has  been  observed,  and  it 
seems  to  me  satisfactorily  shown  by  Dr.  George  Campbell,  in  his 
Notes  on  the  Gospels,  that  Mfraio/H  "  denotes  a  change  to  the  better," 
and  UsTafitlta,  "barely  a  change,  whether  it  be  to  the  better  or  the 
worse" — "that  the  former  marks  a  change  of  mind  that  is  durable 
and  productive  of  consequences ;  the  latter  expresses  only  a  present 
uneasy  feeling  of  regret  or  sorrow  for  what  is  done,  without  regard 
either  to  duration  or  to  effects;  in  fine,  that  the  first  may  properly 
be  translated  into  English,  /o  reform ;  the  second,  to  repent,  in  the 
familiar  acceptation  of  the  word."  He  cites  Favorinus  (an  Italian 
scholar,  died  1 5 27,)  as  defining  fLETafiileLa  '' as  dissatisfactiomvith  one's 
self ,  for  ivliat  one  lias  done,"  "  which  exactly  hits  the  meaning  of  the 
word  repentance ;  whereas  Merai-o/a  is  defined,  a  genuine  correction 
of  faults,  a  change  horn  worse  to  better.  We  cannot  more  exactly 
define  the  word  "  reformation"  "  Luther,  in  his  German  translation, 
has  generally  distinguished  the  two  verbs,  rendering  iieravoeiv^  Biisse 
thun,  and  iiEraiitlEcdai  reiien,  gerenen!' 

This  agrees  well  with  what  our  Confessors  present  in  the  Article 
under  consideration,  that  Repentance  is  "sorrow  for  sin," — then 
should  follow  good  works,  which  are  fruits  of  Repentance.  Hence 
it  is  well  said,  "  Reformation  of  life  must  follow  Repentance" — nay, 
true  Repentance  is  the  very  first  act  in  reformation  of  life,  and  he 
who  does  not  lead  a  new  and  holy  life,  does  not  know  what  true 
Repentance  is. 

Accordingly,  in  our  Catechism  it  is  said:  "  Repentance  is  a  total 
change  of  heart  and  mind."  Schmid,  in  his  Dogmatik,  says:  "The 
first  working  of  divine  grace  is  to  draw  man  away  from  his  sinful 


REPENTANCE.  393 

state  by  producing  in  him  real  pain  on  account  of  sins  committed, 
an  earnest  desire  to  be  delivered  from  their  control."     (p.  361). 

And  this  brings  us  to  the  other  point  made  by  our  Confessors, 
namely,  Tliat  true  Repentance  has  two  parts,  sorrozv  for  sin,  and 
faith  in  Christ. 

I  //  is  sorrozv  for  sin.  This  places  it  in  our  emotional  nature — 
sorrow,  pain,  terror,  alarm,  regret,  are  among  the  expressions  used 
to  designate  these  feelings.  But  not  every  kind  of  sorrow  consti- 
tutes true  Repentance.  Paul  says:  "For  godly  sorrow  worketh 
repentance  to  salvation  not  to  be  repented  of:  but  the  sorrow  of  the 
world  worketh  death."  (2  Cor.  vii.  10.)  "Godly  sorrow"  is  that 
required  by  God,  produced  by  his  truth  and  Spirit  in  an  intelligent 
conviction  of  the  evil  and  heinousness  of  sin,  as  committed  against 
a  good  and  merciful  God  and  his  just  and  holy  law,  and  that  leads 
to  a  thorough  change  of  life.  In  this  verse  the  two  Greek  words 
for  repentance,  already  referred  to,  are  used:  "The  sorrow  accord- 
ing to  God  worketh  fieravmav,  a  reformation,  ending  in  salvation, 
ufieTafielrfTov,  not  to  be  grieved  over  or  regretted."  But  the  sorrow 
arising  from  worldly  considerations  worketh  death. 

Not  even  every  kind  of  sorrow  for  sin,  is,  in  the  true  sense,  a 
godly  sorrow.  That  which  arises  from  fear  of  punishment — and  is 
in  the  nature  of  terror  or  alarm — can  lead  only  to  despair  and 
misery.  This  last  has  usually  been  called  /e^^a/,  but  the  former 
evangelical  Repentance. 

And  while  it  is  true  that  repentance  has  its  seat  in  our  emotional 
nature,  it  is  also  true  that  our  emotions  must  be  reached  through 
the  intellect.  Hence  there  must  be  knowledge  of  sin  and  intelligent 
conviction  of  sin.  There  can  be  no  true  repentance  without  a  cor- 
rect knowledgeof  sin,  at  least  to  some  extent.  Men  are  never 
sorry  for  anything  which  they  have  done,  and,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  it  is  impossible  they  should  be,  unless  they  know  precisely 
7vhat  it  is,  and  why  they  are  sorry  for  it.  It  is  simply  absurd  to  say 
that  you  are  sorry  for  sin,  but  you  do  not  know  what  sin  is,  nor 
why  you  should  be  sorry  for  it. 

Conviction  of  sin  is  in  the  judgment  and  conscience,  which  are 
convinced  of  its  existence  in  ourselves.  That  we  have  broken  the 
divine  law  by  acts  of  omission  and  commission,  in  innumerable  in- 
stances, in  thoughts,  feelings,  words,  motives,  and  desires,  is  clearly 
seen  and  felt.     We  have  been  led  by  God's   Holy  Spirit  to  compare 


394  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

our  lives  and  actions  with  the  divine  law,  and  we  know  that  we  are 
sinners  "by  the  holy  commandments,  which  we  have  not  kept." 
And  the  reason  why  we  should  be  sorry  for  these  sins  is,  because 
God's  law  is  right,  good,  pure,  and  holy ;  but  our  conduct  and  lives 
have  been  wrong,  impure,  and  injurious  to  ourselves  and  our 
fellow-men,  and  dishonorable  to  God.  And  this  sorrow  is  not 
active,  but  passive — not  self-made  or  self  imposed,  as  if  we  must 
make  ourselves  feel  by  certain  direct  efforts  and  exercises,  as  by 
singing  and  working  upon  the  imagination,  by  relating  terrible 
scenes  and  stories,  arousing  the  animal  passions  and  sympathies  in 
times  of  excitement.  But  it  is  produced  by  the  illumination  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  in  the  application  of  the  truth  to  the  heart  and  con- 
science. We  see  the  evil  we  have  done — the  injury  to  God  and  his 
government — to  our  fellow-men  and  the  cause  of  virtue  and  piety — 
to  ourselves,  our  bodies  and  souls — and  regret  it  and  mourn  over  it. 
This  begets  a  sense  of  shame  for  the  filthiness,  vileness,  and  degrad- 
ing influence  of  sin.  It  grieves  us  that  we  have  sinned  against  the 
love  and  mercy  of  God,  so  abundantly  shown  us  in  all  our  past 
lives,  and  especially  in  the  gift  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  sufferings 
and  death  for  us. 

"These  feelings  are  different  in  degree  according  to  the  natural 
temperament  of  the  individual,  the  clearness  of  his  views,  the 
amount  of  his  religious  knowledge,  and  his  actual  guilt."* 

This  must  produce  Jiatred  of  sin  and  a  turning  from  it — Confes- 
sion of  it,  and  an  earnest  desire  to  be  delivered  from  it.  No  cloak- 
ing or  hiding  it,  as  God  cannot  be  deceived — no  excusing  it,  as  it  is 
seen  to  have  been  committed,  in  many  instances,  voluntarily,  against 
light  and  knowledge,  and  the  warnings  of  God  and  good  men. 

Repentance  is  a  continuous  tvork.  Many  persons  seem  to  have  the 
idea  that  they  must  repent  oyice  of  all  their  sins,  and  then  be  done 
with  it  forever — they  must  have  great  sorrow,  so  as  to  be  completely 
broken  down  and  overcome  ;  and  the  more  terrible  their  distress, 
excitement,  lamentations  and  weeping,  the  deeper  and  truer  their 
repentance  is  suppo.sed  to  be;  but  when  "they  get  through,"  then 
they  are  done  with  repentance,  unless,  indeed,  they  should  "fall 
from  grace,"  which  is  almost  certain  to  be  the  case;  then  they  must 
be   renewed  at   the  next  " protracted   meeting"  or  time  of  revival, 

*  S.  S.  Schmucker,  Pop.  Theol.,  p.  1 59. 


REPENTANCE.  395 

by  going  through  the  same  process!  But  must  we  not  reply  to  all 
this,  that  as  long  as  there  is  any  sinning,  even  though  it  be  only 
through  infirmity  and  incautiousness,  there  must  also  be  repenting? 
Luther  says : 

"  Baptizing  with  water  signifies  that  the  old  Adam  in  us  is  to  be 
drowned  and  destroyed  by  daily  sorrow  and  Repentance,  together 
with  all  sins  and  evil  lusts  ;  and  that  again  the  new  man  should  daily 
come  forth  and  rise,  that  shall  live  in  the  presence  of  God  in  right- 
eousness and  purity  forever." 

And  in  the  Smalcald  Articles,  he  says  : 

"  And  this  Repentance  continues  with  Christians  until  death,  for 
it  contends  with  the  remaining  sins  in  the  flesh  during  the  whole 
of  life;  and  St.  Paul  testifies,  in  the  7th  Chapter  of  the  Romans,  that 
he  contends  with  "  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  his  members  ;  "  and 
that  not  by  his  own  unaided  powers,  but  by  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  which  follows  upon  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  This  same  gift 
(the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit)  daily  cleanses  and  scours  out  ot 
us  our  remaining  sins,  and  labors  to  make  us  entirely  pure  and 
holy." 

And  what  are  the  facts  of  the  case  in  the  experience  and  conscious- 
ness of  the  very  best  and  most  faithful  of  Christians  ?  Do  they  ever 
feel  themselves  to  be  anything  but  sinners,  pardoned  and  saved  by 
grace?  Knowledge  of  sin  is  a  part  of  our  Repentance;  but  can  the 
knowledge  of  sin  ever  cease  and  be  forgotten  ?  Does  not  the  con- 
viction of  sin  abide  always?  Do  good  men  ever  cease  to  confess 
their  sins,  and  to  mourn  over  them  even  in  the  midst  of  their  most 
exalted  spiritual  rejoicings  in  a  Saviour's  love?  Never,  never!  And 
is  this  not  continued  repentance  ? 

2.  Tri{e  Repentance  includes  Faith  in  Christ.  It  has  been  a  mooted 
question  whether  faith  comes  before  or  after  repentance.  But  faith 
is  of  two  kinds,  usually  called  historical  dLiid  Justifying.  The  former 
is  simply  belief  of  the  truth  upon  satisfactory  evidence,  and  the  latter 
is  trust  in  Christ  for  salvation.  But  it  is  clear  that  belief  of  the  truth, 
or  historical  faith,  must  come  before  repentance,  as  it  is  by  the  truth 
that  men  come  to  a  knowledge  of  sin  and  are  led  to  see  the  necessity 
of  repentance  ;  hut  justifying  faith  can  only  come  ^/^r  repentance, 
grows  out  of  it  and  is  a  part  of  it.  Repentance,  in  its  first  part  or 
narrower  sense,  is  an  indispensable  antecedent  and  condition  of  sav- 
ing faith,  without  which  it  cannot  exist,  just  as  the  breaking  up  of 


396  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

"  the  fallow  ground  "  and  the  preparation  of  the  soil  are  necessary  to 
the  sprouting  and  growth  of  the  seed  sown  upon  the  earth.  Justify- 
ing faith  cannot  properly  be  said  to  include  repentance,  because,  as 
we  see,  it  must,  in  the  order  of  time,  come  after  it,  and  cannot  take 
place  without  it ;  but  repentance  is  not  and  cannot  be  complete 
without  faith,  and  is  therefore  a  part  of  it.  The  fruit  cannot  be  said 
to  include  the  tree  that  bears  it,  and  without  which  it  could  not  ex- 
ist ;  but  it  is  part  of  the  tree  upon  which  it  grows. 

Let  us  hear  the  great  Melanchthon  a  few  minutes  on  this  subject: 
"  But  inasmuch  as  our  opponents  condemn  what  we  have  stated 
in  regard  to  the  two  parts  of  Repentance,  we  must  show  that  not  we, 
but  the  Scriptures,  have  thus  set  forth  these  two  parts  of  repentance 
or  conversion.  Christ  says  :  '  Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor,  and 
are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest.'  (Matt.  xi.  28.)  Here  are 
two  parts.  The  labor  and  heavy  burden  of  which  Christ  speaks  are 
the  sorrow  for  sin,  the  great  terror  of  the  wrath  of  God  felt  in  the 
heart.  The  other,  tJie  cojuing  to  Christ,  is  faith,  which  believes  that 
for  Jesus'  sake  sins  are  forgiven  us,  and  that  by  the  Holy  Spirit  we 
are  "  born  again  "  and  made  alive.  Therefore  these  two  must  be  the 
most  important  part  of  Repentance,  namely,  sorrow  for  sin  and  faith 
in  Christ.  And  in  Mark  i.  15,  Jesus  says  again  :  '  Repent  ye,  and  be- 
lieve the  Gospel.'  First,  he  makes  us  sinners  and  alarms  us ;  and  then 
comforts  us,  and  announces  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  For,  to  believe 
the  Gospel  is  not  merely  to  receive  the  histories  which  it  contains, 
for  such  faith  even  the  devils  have;  but  it  properly  means  to  believe 
that  through  Christ  sins  are  forgiven  us,  for  this  is  the  faith  which 
the  Gospel  preaches  to  us.  Here  also  you  see  the  two  parts  :  sor- 
row or  alarm  of  the  conscience,  when  he  says,  '  Repent;'  and  faith, 
when  he  says,  '  Believe  the  Gospel.'  Should  now  any  one  say, 
Christ  includes  also  the  fruits  of  repentance,  yea,  the  whole  new  life, 
we  shall  not  seriously  object  to  this.  It  is  enough  for  us  here,  that 
the  Scriptures  expressly  set  forth  these  two  parts ;  sorrow  for  sin, 
and  faith. 

"  So  also  Paul,  in  all  his  Epistles,  as  often  as  he  treats  of  the  man- 
ner of  our  conversion,  unites  these  two  parts.  The  dying  of  'our 
old  man '  (Rom.  vi.  6),  contrition  and  terror  on  account  of  the 
wrath  of  God  and  the  judgment  to  come,  and,  on  the  contrary,  our 
renewing  by  faith.  For  by  faith  we  are  comforted  and  brought  to 
life  again,  and  are  saved  from  death  and  hell.    Of  these  two  parts  he 


REPEMTANCE.  397 

speaks  clearly,  in  Rom.  vi.  2,  4,  11,  that  we  are  '  dead  indeed  unto 
sin,'  caused  by  sorrow  and  alarm,  the  first  part  of  repentance,  and 
are  again  to  be  raised  up  with  Christ,  brought  about  through  faith, 
when  we  again  obtain  life  and  comfort.  And,  inasmuch  as  faith  is 
to  bring  joy  and  peace  to  the  conscience  again,  Rom.  v.  i,  '  Being 
justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God,'  it  follows  that  before 
there  was  terror  and  anguish  in  the  soul.  Therefore  sorrow  for  sin 
and  faith  must  go  together."* 

It  is  clear  then  that  our  Confessors  are  correct  in  stating  that 
true  Repentance  has  these  two  parts,  sorrow  for  sin  and  faith  in 
Christ,  and  that  no  amount  of  contrition  and  alarm  which  does  not 
lead  us  to  trust  in  Christ  for  salvation,  can  be  regarded  as  true  Re- 
pentance. 

*Muller's  Sym.  Biicher,  p.  173. 


ARTICLE  Xlll. 


THE  USE  OF  THE  SACRA- 
MENTS. 

BY  W.  M.  BAUM,  D.  D. 


THE  able  and  distinguished  lecturers  who  have  preceded  me, 
have  been  pleased,  without  exception,  and  with  most  manifest 
propriety  and  advantage,  to  discuss  the  Articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  in  the  order  of  their  occurrence.  The  subject  of  the 
Thirteentli  Article,  which  falls  to  our  present  examination  and  study, 
is  intensely  interesting,  and  pre-eminently  adapted  to  the  wants  and 
peculiarities  of  our  times.  It  belongs  very  pertinently  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  day.  Of  the  entire  number,  we  could  scarcely  have 
selected  one  more  promising  or  more  desirable.  May  its  discussion 
be  attended  with  the  divine  blessing  ! 

No  sooner  had  the  work  of  the  Reformation  been  fully  inaug- 
urated, than  it  became  manifest  that  a  vital  pivotal  point  was  to  be 
found  in  the  question  of  tlie  Sacraments.  Rome  had  so  perverted 
the  design  and  intent  thereof,  in  the  abuses  of  the  Mass,  that  no 
reconciliation  was  possible.  Unwilling  as  the  Reformers  were  to 
make  an  irreconcilable  breach  with  existing  church  authorities,  they 
nevertheless  refused  to  sacrifice  or  compromise  the  truth  for  the 
sake  of  temporary  quietude.  This  question,  therefore,  of  necessity, 
occupies  a  very  prominent  place  in  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

We  have  already  had  presented  in  learned  and  exhaustive  dis- 
cussions, upon  the  Ninth  and  Tenth  articles,  the  teachings  of  the 
word  of  God  as  held  by  the  Reformers,  and  the  Church  since  then, 

398 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  399 

of  the  doctrines  of  Baptism^  and  the  Lord's  Snpper,-\  separately 
considered.  It  remains,  in  order  to  complete  the  cycle  of  sacra- 
mental theology,  to  consider  the  question  of  the  sacraments  in  the 
abstract,  as  it  is  set  forth  in  the  Thirteenth  article,  whose  caption  is 
in  these  words:  ''Of  the  Use  of  the  Sacraments .'' 

Not  only  did  diversity  and  conflict  with  Rome  appear  upon  this 
great  question,  but  very  soon  were  these  manifest  within  the  narrow 
circle  of  the  disenthralled  Church.  Luther  and  Zvvingli,  at  Mar- 
burg, are  both  a  type  and  a  prophecy  of  the  conflicting  tendencies 
and  theories  in  Protestantism.  Around  one  or  the  other  have 
gathered  the  mind  and  the  heart  of  all  succeeding  teachers  and 
expounders  of  God's  word,  maintaining  each,  to  this  hour,  his  own 
interpretation  with  as  unyielding  pertinacity  and  divergent  conclu- 
sions, as  did  the  great  champions,  their  prototypes,  upon  that 
historic  occasion. 

The  accepted  English  version  of  this  Article  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  is  thus  given,  and  is  a  faithful  rendering  of  the  original  :| 

''Concerning  the  use  of  the  Sacraments  our  Churches  teach,  that 
they  were  instituted  not  only  as  the  marks  of  a  Christian  profession 
amongst  men ;  but  rather  as  signs  and  evidences  of  the  zvill  of  God 
toward  us,  for  the  purpose  of  exciting  and  confirming  the  faith  of  those 
who  use  them.  Hence  the  sacraments  ought  to  be  received  with  fiith 
in  the  promises  ivhich  are  exhibited  ajtdsetjorth  by  them. 

"  They  therefore  condemn  those  ivho  teach  that  the  Sacraments  justify 
{ex  opere  operato)  by  the  mere  performance  of  the  act,  and  who  do  not 
teach  that  faith,  which  believes  our  sins  to  be  forgiven,  is  required  in 
the  use  of  the  sacraments!' 

The  sacramental  idea  belongs  to  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment dispensations.  The  name,  it  is  true,  is  not  found  in  the  Bible, 
but  the  thing  signified  is  plainly  revealed  and  enjoined.  Although 
not  distinguished  by  any  particular  title,  we  have  the  ordinances 
pertaining  to  our  holy  religion  minutely  described.  Circumcision 
and  the  Passover  in  the  Old  Testament  dispensation.  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  New,  and  whatever  these  involve  and  in- 
clude, are  instituted.     Their  observance  in  the  Church,  and   by  the 

*By  Rev.  F.  W.  Conrad,  D.  D.,  Quarterly  Revieta,  1874,  p.  477. 
fBy  Rev.  Geo.  Diehl,  D.  D.,  Quarterly  Review,  1875,  P-  A^9' 
it  See  Creeds  of  Christendom  (Schaff),  vol.  3,  p.  15. 


400  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Church,  is  imph'ed  and  demanded  by  the  very  fact  of  their  divine 
appointment  and  preservation. 

The  Early  Christian  Fathers. 

The  teaching  of  the  early  Christian  Fathers  concerning  the  sacra- 
ments, are  neither  very  definite,  nor  very  satisfactory.  With  all  we 
find  due  appreciation  of  the  importance  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  but  not  a  very  clear  apprehension  of  their  relation  to  each 
other,  or  to  the  other  rites  and  ceremonies  of  our  faith. 

The  word"  Sacrajnent"  comes  into  the  terminology  of  Christianity 
mainly  through  the  Vulgate  and  other  ancient  Latin  versions  of  the 
Bible.  It  is  there  used  in  the  translation  as  the  synonym  of  the 
Greek  fivarf/piov,  including  of  course  many  more  things  than  the  two 
sacraments  of  later  times.  Its  introduction  and  use  may  also  be 
traced  in  part  to  a  classic  origin.  The  Latin  word  "  Sacramentum  " 
was  used  to  designate  the  sum  of  money  deposited  with  the  high 
priest,  or  legal  functionary,  before  the  commencement  of  a  suit  at 
law,  and  which  was  forfeited  for  public  uses  by  the  defeated  party. 
It  was  also  employed  to  signify  an  oath,  such  as  that  by  which  the 
soldier  bound  himself  to  fidelity  to  his  commander  and  his  country. 

Even  Pagan  usages  may  have  contributed  to  the  employment  of 
some  special  designation  for  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  Christianity. 
Their  priests,  in  order  to  enhance  their  importance  in  the  eyes  of 
the  multitude,  were  accustomed  to  celebrate  their  sacred  rites  in 
secret,  and  to  call  them  mysteries.  The  early  Christian  Fathers* 
sought  similar  results  by  performing  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
privately,  from  which  all  were  excluded  but  the  initiated,  and  hence 
the  title  mysteries  or  sacraments. 

We  may  not  be  able  to  say  with  certainty  why  this  term  was 
selected  and  appropriated  to  this  special  service,  or  why  this  special 
and  limited  signification  was  given  to  it,  but  of  the  fact  there  remains 
no  doubt.  Its  continuance  in  this  usage  for  so  many  centuries, 
identifies  it  forever  with  the  sacred  ordinances  of  Christianity. 

With  the  earliest  patristic  writers,  the  use  of  this  term  was  not  as 
limited  as  it  has  since  become. 

TertJillian\  was  confessedly  the  most  influential  among  the  Fathers 

*See  Dr.  E.  Pond's  Christian  Theology,  pp.  670,  671. 
t  Hagenbach's  Hist,  of  Doctrines,  Vol.  I.  p.  212. 


THE    USE    OF   THE    SACRAMENTS.  4OI 

in  the  matter  of  terminology.  To  him  may  be  traced  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  phrases  so  long  in  use,  Novum  Testamentum,  Trinitas, 
Peccatum  Originale,  Satisfactio,  etc.  With  him  begins  the  use  of 
Sacramentitni  in  this  connection.  He  speaks  of  sacramentum  bap- 
tismatis  et  eucharistise,  and  sacramentum  aqufe  et  eucharistae,  whilst 
he  also  uses  it  in  a  more  general  sense,  speaking  even  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion  as  a  sacrament. 

Cyprian,  who  comes  next  in  order  of  time,  does  not  seem  to  ob- 
serve any  exxlusive  terminology.  He  applies  this  word  indiscrim- 
inately to  the  Lord's  Supper,  to  the  Trinity,  and  the  Lord's  prayer. 
Thus  it  appears  that  whatever  implied  a  high  religious  idea,  as  well 
as  the  more  profound  doctrines  of  the  Church,  were  spoken  of  as 
sacraments  without  any  acknowledged  recognition  of  a  systematic 
definition. 

In  the  day  and  under  the  influence  oi  Atigtistine,  who,  if  not  the 
most  learned,  is  ever  regarded  as  the  greatest  of  the  Christian 
Fathers,  the  idea  of  the  sacraments  was  much  more  clearly  appre- 
hended and  defined.  Without  speaking  of  their  number,  he  desig- 
nates them  as  tJic  visible  zuord,  and  unfolded  the  mysterious  union 
of  the  word  with  the  external  element.  When  honestly  and  logi- 
cally applied  we  believe  the  definitions  of  Augustine*  will  leave 
none  but  those  now  included  by  Protestants  in  the  number  of  the 
sacraments,  yet  even  he  at  times  uses  the  word  in  a  more  general 
sense,  embracing  matrimony,  holy  orders,  exorcism,  i.  e.,  the  re- 
nunciation of  the  devil  at  Baptism,  and  other  sacred  ceremonies. 

The  Scholastics. 

Among  the  Scholastics  the  Sacraments  had  special  interest  and 
significance.  Accepting  the  terminology  of  Tertullian,  and  the 
definition  of  Augustine,  they  attempted  to  formulate  their  views 
more  definitely  and  systematically. 

Special  attention  was  given  to  the  nunibey\  of  the  Sacraments. 
There  seems  to  be  no  rule  or  standard  for  a  satisfactory  determi- 
nation  of   this   difficult   question,  which   was   intensified    by  their 

*  Sacramentum  est  sacra  rei  signum;  Accedit  verbum  ad  elementum  et  fit 
sacramentum. 

See  Hagenbach's  Hist,  of  Doctrines,  Vol.  H.,  p.  "jb. 

t  See  Dr.  Van  Osterzee,  Vol.  H.,  p.  741. 

See  Dr.  Hodge's  Systematic  Theology,  Vol.  HI.,  p.  495. 


402  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

divergent  views  and  definitions  until  the  happy  thought  occurred  to 
Peter  Lombard  that  as  seven  was  the  sacred  number,  there  must 
needs  be  seven  sacraments.  Rabanus  Maurus  advocated  four, 
Dionysius  Areopagiticus  demanded  six,  whilst  Peter  Damiani  would 
be  content  with  nothing  short  of  twelve,  the  apostolic  number.  The 
scholastic  acuteness  and  determined  zeal  of  Peter  Lombard,  how- 
ever, prevailed,  and  his  view  was  endorsed  and  approved,  first  by 
the  Council  of  Florence,  1439,  ^"<^  ^^''^'^  ^f  Trent,  1547,  and  con- 
tinues unto  this  day  as  the  accepted  number,  held  and  proclaimed 
by  the  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy.  The  views  of  Hugo  of  St. 
Victor  deserve  a  passing  notice.  He  divided  the  sacraments  into 
three  classes;  first,  those  pertaining  to  salvation,  viz:  baptism, 
confirmation,  and  the  Lord's  Supper;  secondly,  those  pertaining  to 
sanctification,  viz:  the  use  of  holy  water,  sprinkling  with  ashes,  etc.; 
thirdly,  those  pertaining  to  preparation  for  utilizing  the  others, 
such  as  holy  orders,  the  consecration  of  robes  of  the  clergy,  and 
others. 

Before  leaving  this  interesting  and  fruitful  chapter  of  the  writings 
of  the  ante-Reformation  period,  we  cite  the  speculations  of  the  well- 
known  Bonaventura.  Accepting  the  number  seven  as  the  true  one, 
he  brought  them  severally  into  connection  with  the  seven  diseases 
of  man.  Original  sin  is  counteracted  by  Baptism,  mortal  sin  by 
penance,  venial  sin  by  extreme  unction,  ignorance  is  cured  by  ordi- 
nation, malice  by  the  Lord's  Supper,  infirmity  hy  confirmation,  and 
evil  concupiscence  by  matrimony.  The  criticism  of  Schleiermacher 
upon  this  representation  is  no  less  just  than  humorous:  "The  poor 
laity  have  no  sacrament  for  ignorance,  nor  have  the  poor  clergy  a 
sacrament  to  counteract  lusts."  The  fertile  brain  of  this  ecclesiastic 
soon  discovered  an  intimate  connection  between  the  seven  sacra- 
ments and  the  seven  cardmal  virtues  of  humanity;  thus  Baptim 
leads  to  faith,  confirmation  to  hope,  the  Lord's  Supper  to  love,  penance 
to  righteousness,  extreme  unction  to  perseverance,  ordination  to  zvisdom, 
matrimony  to  moderation. 

Thomas  Aquinas  finds  the  analogy  between  the  natural  and 
spiritual  life  of  man,  both  recognized  and  provided  for  in  the  ex- 
istence of  the  seven  sacraments.  Thus  man  is  born,  then  strength- 
ened, then  nourished,  furnished  with  means  of  recovery  from  illness, 
with  means  to  propagate  his  race,  to  live  under  the  guidance  of  legit- 
imate authority,  and  to  be  prepared  for  his  departure  from  this  world. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  403 

The  exact  counterpart  for  all  this  he  finds  in  his  spiritual  nature,  and 
for  all  these  necessities  and  emergencies  the  sacraments  make  full 
provision.  Man  is  born  spiritually  in  baptism,  strengthened  by  con- 
firmation, nourished  by  the  Lord's  Supper,  recovered  from  spiritual 
malady  by  penance,  the  Church  is  continued  by  holy  matrimony,  a 
supernatural  guide  is  found  in  the  sacrament  of  orders,  whilst  ex- 
treme unction  completes  the  equipment  for  death. 

Such  is  a  mere  glance  at  the  gradual  development  of  the  sacra- 
mental idea,  which  is  manifestly  ecclesiastical  rather  than  biblical  in 
its  nature.  As  far  as  it  is  in  perfect  accord  with  the  teachings  of 
the  word  of  God,  it  is  or  should  be  accepted  by  Christians  ;  but  as 
it  is  now  enunciated,  it  is  not  formally  found  therein. 

The  Reformers. 

We  are  thus  prepared  the  better  to  appreciate  the  complex  diffi- 
culties which  attended  the  work  of  the  Reformers,  and  the  more  to 
admire  the  discernment,  wisdom  and  fidelity  they  displayed  in  its 
accomplishment. 

As  in  the  day  of  Christ,  the  truth  of  the  Old  Testament  had  been 
obscured  and  almost  buried  beneath  the  additions  and  traditions  of 
the  scribes  and  elders,  so  in  the  day  of  the  Reformation,  the  truth 
of  the  Gospel  was  in  like  manner  sadly  disfigured  and  distorted  by 
the  inventions  and  the  speculations  of  the  schoolmen,  the  mj'stics 
and  the  ecclesiastics,  and  could  scarcely  be  an\'  longer  recognized 
as  the  word  of  Christ  and  of  His  apostles. 

To  bring  order  out  of  this  chaos,  to  eliminate  the  simple  truth  out 
of  its  intricate  enfoldings,  to  sift  and  to  separate  the  divine  from  the 
human  in  the  current  teachings  of  the  Church,  was  the  duty  and 
the  danger  of  the  hour.  To  it  the  framers  and  expounders  of  the 
Aug-sburg  Confession  were  called  and  committed,  and  in  it  they 
achieved  a  success  as  marvelous  as  it  has  been  enduring.  Inferior 
to  the  first  apostles  only  in  the  particular  of  personal  intercourse 
with  Christ,  and  of  direct  inspiration,  they  have  witnessed  such  a 
good  Confession,  that  to  this  day  we  thankfully  believe  it  and 
proudly  teach  it. 

The  Article  under  consideration  is  itself  the  best  and  most  satis- 
factory exhibit  of  the  views  of  the  Reformers  upon  the  subject  of 
which  it  treats. 

So  happily  conceived  and  accurately  stated  is  it,  that  it  has  been 


404  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

the  easily  recognized  basis  of  every  subsequent  Protestant  Confes- 
sion, as  it  has  been  bodily*  transferred  and  almost  literally  incor- 
porated as  Article  XXV.  of  the  Articles  of  Religion  of  the  Church 
of  England. 

In  a  few  exceptional  cases  only.f  as  in  the  Apology  to  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  and  then  not  absolutely  but  figuratively,  as  is 
affirmed  and  maintained  by  the  learned  and  ingenuous  Dr.  Leonard 
Hutter,  do  any  of  the  Confessional  writings  or  acknowledged  leaders 
of  the  Reformation  speak  of  more  than  two  sacraments.  Baptism 
and  the  Lord's  Supper  alone  meet  all  the  requirements  thereof 
Other  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church,  which  may  be  very  ap- 
propriate in  themselves,  and  very  helpful  to  believers,  may  also  in 
some  particulars  partake  of  a  sacramental  character,  and  may  in 
many  respects  resemble  a  true  sacrament,  yet  do  not  complete  the 
entire  representation,  so  as  to  justify  their  permanent  enrollment  as 
of  divine  appointment. 

At  the  time  of  the  preparation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
the  enunciation  of  the  faith  of  what  has  since  grown  into  the  well- 
defined  system  of  Protestantism,  two  fearful  evils  concerning  the 
sacraments  were  possible ;  two  terrible  extremes,  alike  dangerous, 
were  imminent.  The  avoidance  of  the  one  greatly  endangered  the 
encountering  of  the  other.  Many  a  precious  bark,  in  fleeing  Scylla, 
has  been  wrecked  upon  Charybdis.  May  we  not  devoutly  recog- 
nize and  acknowledge  God's  hand  in  the  guidance  of  the  Gospel 
crew,  by  which  they  escaped  both,  and,  as  we  firmly  believe,  res- 
cued the  Church  from  the  errors  and  evils  of  materialistic  exagger- 
ation on  the  one  hand,  as  seen  in  the  ex  opcre  opcrato  fallacy  of  the 
Papacy,   and    its    effeminate    offspring    usually  denominated    High 

*See  Dr.  Morris'  Art.  in  the  Phila.  Luth.  Diet,  1877,  pp.  15-26. 

^  MclancJithoii  at  first  questioned  the  propriety  of  using  a  word  not  found  in 
the  Bible  to  designate  the  sacred  institutions  of  the  Church :  vide  Loci  Com- 
munes, 1 521  (Cor.  Ref.  ed.  Bretschneider,  p.  210).  According  to  Thiersch,  11., 
p.  206,  he  would  have  allowed  ordination  and  marriage  to  be  sacraments,  as 
he  actually  admitted  absolution  in  the  Apology  :  "absolutio  proprie  dici  protest 
sacramentum."  In  the  Loci  Com.,  1521  (Cor.  Ref.,  p.  211),  however,  he  says, 
"  Duo  sunt  autem  signa  a  Christo  in  Evangelio  instituta ;  baptismus  et  parti- 
cipatio  mensae  Domini. 

Luthir  speaks  of  Baptismus,  Poenitentia,  Panis,  as  sacraments,  in  his  work 
De  Captiv.  Babyl.,  whilst  in  his  Catech.  Major,  penance  is  included  in  bap- 
tism.    See  Hagenbach,  Vol.  IL,  303. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  405 

Churchism,  and  of  rationalistic  ignoring,  on  the  other,  by  which  all 
meaning  and  efficiency  are  lost,  as  seen  in  the  mere  outward  cere- 
mony theory  of  Socinianism,  and  its  natural  concomitant  usually 
designated  Zwinglianism. 

Safely  and  grandly  between  these  did  they  direct  their  course, 
bringing  out,  in  the  clearest  light,  the  nature,  necessity,  design,  and 
significance  of  these  divine  institutions. 

In  endeavoring  to  arrive  at  a  clear  and  definite  view  of  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Reformers  and  the  Symbols  upon  this  question,  we  are 
at  the  same  time  attaining  acquaintance  with  the  views  of  the  ablest 
theologians  of  all  subsequent  times.  Their  masterly  efforts  and 
scriptural  statements  have  well  nigh  exhausted  the  field  of  inquiry, 
and  leave  but  little  for  us  to  accomplish,  except  to  verify  and 
emphasize  their  statements. 

Such  was  the  providential  disposition  of  the  Christian  world, 
political  and  religious,  in  that  day,  that  the  whole  energy  of  human 
thought,  the  whole  power  of  human  learning,  and  the  whole 
strength  of  human  faith,  and  love,  and  party  attachment,  were  given 
to  the  study  and  the  defence  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.  It  was 
a  single  and  an  absorbing  pursuit.  The  results  attained  demonstrate 
the  thoroughness  and  the  fidelity  of  the  labor  performed. 

It  is  very  manifest  that  neither  the  Old  nor  the  New  Testament 
Scriptures  furnish  any  formal  definition  of  a  Sacrament;  nor  do  the 
writings  of  the  Greek  Apologists,  or  the  Latin  Fathers,  or  the 
schoolmen  of  the  middle  ages,  present  anything  that  has  been  re- 
garded as  authoritative  and  final.  The  conclusions  of  the  Council 
at  Trent  have  decided  the  question  so  far  as  Romanism  is  con- 
cerned ;  and  though  widely  and  diametrically  opposed  thereto, 
evangelical  Protestantism  has  also  reached  very  clear  and  definite, 
and,  may  we  not  believe,  ultimate  conclusions. 

Beginning  with  the  simple  idea  of  mystery,  as  descriptive  of  the 
doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom,  we  have  next 
the  added  thought  of  obligation  incurred  by  the  believer  and  the 
participant.  Then  comes  out  more  definitely  the  relation  between 
the  written  word  and  the  instituted  ordinance;  and  then  gradually 
the  concci)tion  of  the  Sacraments  as  a  channel,  and  finally  as  the 
only  channel,  through  which  God's  grace  is  bestowed  upon  man. 
Beyond  this  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  to  what  human  ingenuity  or 
ecclesiastical  device  could  have  advanced.  Divine  grace  shut  up 
27 


406  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  the  Sacraments;  the  Sacraments  belonging  exclusively  to  the 
Church  ;  the  Church  the  only  depository  and  guard  of  the  word  of 
God — there  can  be  of  course  no  salvation  out  of  the  Church,  and 
there  can  be  no  opposition  or  resistance  of  the  power  or  decisions 
of  the  Church.  Having  received  the  efficacious  grace  signified  and 
conferred  by  the  use  of  the  Sacraments,  these  need  only  be  continued 
by  the  faithful  to  have  it  strengthened  and  increased,  or  assiduously 
used  by  the  negligent  to  have  it  restored. 

It  matters  very  little  what  we  call  a  Sacrament,  if  our  definition  be 
broad  enough  to  embrace  it,  and  there  is  nothing  in  revelation  or  in 
history  that  presents  any  limit.  Nor  does  it  matter  how  many  Sac- 
raments we  regard  as  obligatory,  provided  only  we  do  not  give  to 
all  the  same  authority,  nor  ascribe  to  them  all  the  same  import  and 
efficacy.* 

In  order,  however,  to  reach  uniformity  of  view  and  practice,  and. 
to  avoid  the  risk  of  teaching  such  unscriptural  exaggerations  as  were 
endorsed  and  promulgated  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  yet  not 
incur  the  charge  Romanism  constantly  makes,  that  we  ignore  and 
destroy  the  sacraments,  our  theologians  have  drawn  in  their  writings 
full  and  frequent  descriptions  of  their  nature,  design  and  efficacy. 
These  are  briefly,  but  yet  thoroughly  and  schentifically  stated  in 
the  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  under  consideration. 

The  Symbols. 

In  systematic  theology,  the  Sacraments  belong  to  the  department 

of  Soteriology.     They  logically  and  necessarily  follow  "  the  word  of 

God,"  in  the  enumeration  of  the  means  of  grace  and  of  salvation. 

.The  initial  operation  of  the   Holy  Ghost  upon  the  heart  and  con- 

*Apol.  Conf.  Art.  VII.  "With  respect,  however,  to  the  seven  sacraments, 
we  find  that  the  fathers  differed,  consequently  these  seven  ceremonies  are  not 
all  equally  necessary. 

"  If  we  regard  as  sacraments  the  external  signs  and  ceremonies  which  God 
enjoined  and  with  which  he  connected  the  promise  of  grace,  it  is  easy  to  de- 
termine what  are  sacraments  ;  for  ceremonies  and  other  external  things  insti- 
tuted by  men  are  not  sacraments  in  this  sense,  because  men  cannot  promise 
the  grace  of  God  without  divine  authority.  Signs,  therefore,  which  are  insti- 
tuted without  the  command  of  God,  are  not  signs  of  grace,  although  they  may 
be  memorials  to  children  and  to  the  ignorant,  like  a  painted  cross. 

"  But  no  intelligent  man  will  lay  great  stress  upon  the  number  of  sacraments, 
whether  seven  or  more  ;  provided  only  that  the  word  and  command  of  God 
be  niaifttained." 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  407 

science  of  man  is  through  the  word.  When  not  opposed  and  re- 
sisted by  the  will  of  man,  the  truth  of  God  produces  its  appointed 
and  legitimate  results:  "  it  has  an  active,  supernatural  and  truly- 
divine  power  of  producing  supernatural  effects ;  in  other  words,  of 
converting,  regenerating,  and  renewing  the  minds  of  men."*  This 
power,  transcending  beyond  comparison  all  that  may  be  predicated 
of  the  convincing  force  of  the  highest  human  oratory,  is  due  solely 
and  entirely  to  the  presence  and  efficacy  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
word.  In  the  economy  of  redemption  and  the  application  of  the 
means  of  grace,  the  word  and  the  Spirit  are  always  associated. 

By  this  provision  the  way  is  opened  for  imparting  grace  to  man  ; 
but  the  faith  wrought  by  the  preached  word  must  be  strengthened 
and  confirmed,  for  which  there  has  been  appointed  in  the  Church 
the  visible  ivord,  in  the  form  of  divinely  instituted  rites  or  ceremo- 
nies, now  named  Sacraments,  through  which,  by  means  of  external 
visible  signs,  this  saving  grace  is  secured  to  man,  or  if  already  pos- 
sessed, is  reassured  to  him. 

Chemnitz,  Ex.  Tr.  Con.,  says:  "  God  does  not  impart  His  grace 
in  this  life  all  at  once,  so  that  it  is  straightway  absolute  and  finished, 
so  that  God  has  nothing  more  to  confer,  man  nothing  more  to  re- 
ceive ;  but  God  is  always  giving  and  man  is  always  receiving,  so  as 
ever  to  be  more  closely  and  perfectly  joined  to  Christ,  to  hold  more 
and  more  firmly  the  pardon  of  sins;  so  that  the  benefits  of  redemp- 
tion, which  have  been  begun  in  us,  may  be  preserved,  strengthened, 
and  increased." 

This  we  regard  as  the  true  import  and  interpretation  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  of  the  Apology,  concerning  the 
use  of  the  Sacraments,  which  is  also  reiterated  and  reaffirmed  with 
unexampled  uniformity  of  view,  by  the  long  line  of  able  and  learned 
divines  who  have  been  revered  and  trusted  in  our  Church  as  ex- 
pounders of  the  word  of  God.  and  "  of  the  faith  of  our  Church 
founded  upon  that  word." 

The  views  of  Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  the  other  theologians  at 
Wittenberg,  prior  to  the  Diet  in  15 30,  may  be  regarded  as  authorita- 
tively and  accurately  set  forth  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  which 
received  their  united  and  unqualified  approval  and  endorsement. 
Therein  they  utter  no  uncertain  sound.     They  were  distinctly  un- 

*See  Schmid's  Doct.  Theol.  Luth.  Church,  p.  517. 


408  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

derstood,  as  they  designed  they  should  be,  not  only  by  the  great 
body  of  the  theologians  of  the  papal  hierarchy,  but  also  by  those 
violent  errorists,  the  Anabaptists,  and  such  enthusiasts  as  Andrew 
Bodenstein,  familiarly  known  as  Carlstadt,  the  place  of  his  birth,  and 
Zwinglius  and  CEcolampadius,  and  the  like. 

In  the  first  paragraph  of  the  seventh  article  of  the  Apology,  it  is 
stated :  "  Our  adversaries  admit  our  assertion  in  the  thirteenth 
article,  that  Sacraments  are  not  mere  signs,  by  which  men  recognize 
each  other,  like  the  countersign,  court-livery,  &c.,  but  efficacious 
signs  and  sure  testimonies  of  God's  grace  and  purposes  towards  us, 
by  which  He  admonishes  and  strengthens  our  hearts  to  believe  the 
more  firmly  and  joyfully."  In  a  subsequent  paragraph  of  this  same 
article,  we  have  this  additional  testimony  :  "  We  cannot,  however, 
too  carefully  consider,  or  speak  too  freely  of  the  abuses  and  errors 
introduced  by  the  pernicious,  shameful  and  impious  doctrine  of  the 
opus  cperatum,  namely,  that  the  mere  use  of  the  Sacraments,  the 
work  performed,  makes  us  just  before  God,  and  secures  His  grace, 
even  without  a  good  disposition  of  the  heart.  Hence  originated  the 
unspeakable  and  abominable  abuse  of  the  mass.  They  cannot  show 
a  particle  of  truth  from  the  writings  of  the  ancient  Fathers  to  sup- 
port the  opinions  of  the  Scholastics,  Nay,  Augustine  says,  directly 
to  the  contrary,  that  it  is  not  the  Sacraments  that  justify,  h\x.\.  faith  in 
their  use  justifies  us  in  the  sight  of  God."  From  this  noble  utter- 
ance, alike  evangelical,  scriptural  and  Lutheran,  no  genuine  Protes- 
tant can  logically  dissent.  Of  it  we  may  quote  the  hearty  endorse- 
ment of  many  names  widely  and  most  favorably  known  and  honored 
for  their  piety,  ability,  and  learning. 

Endorsement  of  the  Symbols. 
From  Martin  Chemnitz,  "  the  greatest  pupil  of  Melanchthon,  and 
the  prince  among  the  Lutheran  divines  of  his  age,"  one  of  the  most 
famous  of  the  learned  Professors  at  Wittenberg,  who  was  already  in 
the  promise  of  early  manhood  when  Luther  died,  and  who  had 
attained  the  maturity  of  his  powers  when  Melanchthon  was  called 
to  his  reward,  and  who  with  Andrese  and  Selnecker  formed  the 
theological  triumvirate  who  more  than  all  others  gave  shape,  and 
form,  and  point  to  the  Formula  of  Concord,  we  make  the  following 
extract :  * 

*ExTrie.,  II.,  35. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  409 

"  God,  in  those  things  which  pertain  to  our  salvation,  is  pleased 
to  treat  with  us  through  certain  means;  he  himself  has  ordained  this 
use  of  them,  and  instituted  the  word  of  gospel  promise,  which  some- 
times is  proposed  to  us  by  itself  or  nakedly,  and  sometimes  clothed 
or  made  visible  by  certain  rites  or  sacraments  appointed  by  him." 

From  the  equally  learned  and  distinguished  teacher  and  author 
who  followed  Chemnitz  as  Professor  at  Wittenberg,  the  voluminous 
Dr.  Leonard  Hutter,  we  offer  the  following:  * 

"A  Sacrament  is  a  sacred  rite  divinely  instituted,  consisting  partly 
of  an  external  element  or  sign,  and  partly  of  a  celestial  object,  by 
which  God  not  only  seals  the  promise  of  grace  peculiar  to  the 
Gospel  {i.  e.  of  gratuitous  reconciliation,)  but  also  truly  presents 
through  the  external  elements,  to  the  individuals  using  the  Sacra- 
ment, the  celestial  blessings  promised  in  the  institution  of  each  of 
them,  and  also  savingly  applies  the  same  to  those  who  believe." 

Dr.  John  Gerhard,  the  pupil  of  Hutter,  who  has  been  often  called 
the  most  eminent  of  Lutheran  theologians,  and  of  whom  the  ven- 
erable Dr.  Tholuck  said:  "  He  was  the  m.ost  learned,  and  with  the 
learned,  the  most  beloved,  among  the  heroes  of  Lutheran  Ortho- 
doxy,"t  writes  the  following  (VHI.,  328):  "A  Sacrament  is  a 
sacred  and  solemn  rite,  divinely  instituted,  by  which  God,  through 
the  ministry  of  man,  dispenses  heavenly  gifts,  under  a  visible  and 
external  element,  through  a  certain  word,  in  order  to  offer,  apply 
and  seal  to  those  using  them  and  belie7>ing,  the  special  promise  of 
the  Gospel  concerning  the  gratuitous  remission  of  sins." 

"Two  things  are  absolutely  requisite  to  constitute  a  sacrament, 
properly  so  called,  viz..  the  word  and  the  element,  according  to  the 
well-known  saying  of  Augustine :  '  The  word  is  added  to  the  ele- 
ment and  it  becomes  a  sacrament.'  This  assertion  is  based  upon 
the  very  nature  and  aim  of  the  sacraments  since  the  sacraments  are 
intended  to  present  to  the  senses  in  the  garb  of  an  external  element, 
that  same  thing  that  is  preached  in  the  gospel  message,  from  which 
it  readily  follows  that  neither  the  word  without  the  element,  nor  the 
element  without  the  word,  constitutes  the  sacrament.  By  the  word 
is  understood  first,  the  command  and  divine  institution  through  which 
the  element,  because  thus  appointed  by  God,  is  separated  from  a 

*Comp.  Log.  Th.,  221,  214. 

fSee  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss'  "Digest  of  Christian  Doctrine,"  Introduction. 


41 0  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

common  use  and  set  apart  for  a  sacramental  use;  and,  secondly,  the 
promise  peculiar  to  the  Gospel  to  be  applied  and  sealed  by  the  sac- 
rament. By  the  element  is  meant  not  any  arbitrarily  chosen  ele- 
ment, but  that  which  has  been  fixed  and  mentioned  in  the  words  of 
the  institution." 

John  Andrew  Quenstedt,  D.  D.,  another  of  the  truly  distinguished 
professors  of  Wittenberg,  writes  thus:  "  God  has  added  to  the  word 
of  the  Gospel,  as  another  communicative  means  of  salvation,  the 
sacraments  which  constitute  the  visible  word." 

That  we  may  not  burden  this  discussion  with  excessive  quotation, 
we  omit  many  others  of  similar  import  and  authority.  The  citations 
already  adduced  serve  the  double  purpose  of  showing  what  inter- 
pretation was  put  upon  the  Confession  and  its  Apology  on  this 
subject,  and  of  the  striking  agreement,  in  all  essential  particulars, 
between  these  several  witnesses. 

Theology,  it  has  been  said,  is  not  a  progressive  science.  This  is 
true  of  this  doctrine.  There  was  advance  in  the  interpretation  and 
representation  of  it  until  it  M^as  brought  to  conform  in  all  particulars 
with  the  revealed  teachings  of  God's  word  ;  but  when  once  clearly 
expressed  in  the  happy  terms  of  the  Confession,  it  has  remained 
unchanged  unto  this  day,  and  will,  we  may  confidently  believe,  con- 
tinue in  this  form  until  the  means  of  grace  shall  happily  no  longer 
be  needed. 

In  the  light  which  this  discussion  thus  far  has  brought  to  the 
understanding  of  this  important  and  interesting  Article  of  our  Con- 
fession, we  may  venture  to  examine  in  detail  its  several  declarations. 

The  Sacraments  as  External  Signs. 

"  Concerrmig  the  use  of  the  sacraments^  our  churches  teach  that 
they  were  instituted  not  only  as  marks  of  a  (^Christian)  profession 
anions^  mm,  .    .       " 

If  "not  on/y"  (non  modo)  for  this  purpose,  yet  manifestly,  along 
with  this  purpose,  for  something  beyond.  The  purpose  for  which 
they  were  instituted  was  not  limited  to  this  one  design. 

We  accept  then  the  sacraments  as  "  marks  of  a  profession  amongst 
men,"  as  pertaining  to  the  visibility  of  the  Church,  and  as  such 
both  valuable  and  indispensable.  We  have  only  to  consider  the 
necessities  of  our  complex  nature,  of  reason  and  sense,  of  body  and 
soul,  to  be  convinced  of  the  wisdom  and  the  propriety  of  a  set  of 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  4 1  I 

external  rites  and  ceremonies  in  our  system  of  religion.  There 
must  be  arrangement  and  provision  for  the  whole  nature  of  man,  for 
the  exercise  of  all  his  faculties  and  powers,  so  that  through  his 
bodily  senses,  his  spiritual  emotions  may  be  aroused  and  sustained. 

Under  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  a  proselyte  could  only  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  immunities  of  citizenship  in  the  commonwealth  ot 
Israel  by  submitting  to  the  rite  of  circumcision;  in  like  manner, 
participation  in  the  Christian  sacraments  is  a  public  declaration  of 
faith  in  Christ.  They  are,  therefore,  "  badges  of  Christian  men's 
profession." 

Our  blessed  Saviour  did  not  confine  himself  in  his  instructions  to 
the  mere  utterance  of  the  word,  the  simple  declaration  of  the  truth, 
but  ever  accompanied  it  with  some  striking  illustration,  pressing 
into  His  service  whatever  nearest  at  hand  presented  itself  as  avail- 
able. The  occupations  and  occurrences  of  his  hearers,  the  objects 
within  the  vision  of  those  about  him,  helped  to  unfold  his  meaning 
and  quicken  their  apprehension.  A  system  that  has  no  reference 
to  the  bodily  constitution  of  man,  may  do  for  angels,  but  it  is  not 
fitted  for  men,  since  it  ignores  one-half  their  nature. 

Quakers*  reject  both  the  name  and  the  idea  of  a  sacrament. 
According  to  Barclay,  they  acknowledge  only  spiritual  Baptism  and 
a  mystical  Lord's  Supper. 

The  rejection  of  a  name,  confessedly  not  in  the  Bible,  and  never 
enjoined  by  divine  authority,  is  not  a  matter  of  any  importance. 
If  those  who  use  it,  do  so  by  their  own  option,  the  same  right  re- 
mains to  those  who  do  not  use  it  to  refuse  its  adoption. 

The  rejection  of  an  idea,  however,  which  involves  the  ignoring  of 
positive  enactments,  the  disregard  of  the  word  and  the  example  of 
our  blessed  Lord  and  his  immediate  followers,  is  immeasurably 
more  serious  and  responsible. 

The  authority  to  spiritualize,  and  thereby  entirely  to  destroy  the 
commanded  ordinances  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  implies 
and  demands  similar  treatment  of  all  of  Christ's  commanded  insti- 
tutions. Marriage,  with  all  its  blessed  sanctions  and  restraints, 
niust  be  rejected;  public  worship,  with  all  its  supports  and  incen- 
tives, nmst  be  abandoned  ;  the  Sabbath,  with  all  its  healthful  and 
corrective  power,  must  be  obliterated;  and  the  Church, di^  an  institu- 
tion of  God,  must  be  disbanded. 


*See  Winer's  Confessions  of  Christendom,  p.  230, 


412  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  logic  which  puts  a  period  to  the  vaHdity  of  Christ's  com- 
mands necessarily  terminates  the  value  of  his  promises.  Whilst  it 
excludes  external  ceremonies  from  the  Church,  it  destroys  the 
Church  itself,  leaves  believers  without  the  means  of  mutual  recog- 
nition and  assistance,  destroys  both  opportunity  and  motive,  either 
to  declare  or  to  defend  our  faith  in  Christ  and  our  love  to  God,  or 
to  detect  and  expose,  to  resist  and  refute  false  doctrines  and  errors. 
Upon  the  supposition  of  the  truth  and  inspiration  of  the  Gospel 
narratives,  in  which  is  contained  the  record  of  the  appointment,  by 
Christ,  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  with  the  accompanying 
commands  as  to  their  continuance,  we  may  well  demand  the 
reasons  for  their  abrogation.  When  and  by  whom  was  the  edict 
promulgated?  By  what  authentication  was  it  attended?  What 
occurrences  or  circumstances  rendered  their  future  use  no  longer 
desirable  or  necessary? 

The  value  and  utility  of  the  Sacraments,  in  this  respect,  may  be 
clearly  recognized  in  their  influence  upon  the  maintenance  and  pro- 
pagation of  religion.  Thereby  children  are  instructed  as  to  the 
nature  of  God's  kingdom,  and  their  attachment  to  it  secured. 
Thereby  heathen,  heretics  and  unbelievers  are  addressed,  and  may 
be  impressed,  when  the  preached  word  would  be  disregarded. 
Thereby  the  powerful  bond  of  human  friendship  and  fellowship  is 
introduced,  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  weak  and  support  the 
faith  of  the  faint. 

The  public  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  pointing  back,  as 
they  do,  with  unerring  certainty,  to  the  time  and  the  circumstances 
of  their  institution  by  Christ,  are  an  argument  in  behalf  of  Chris- 
tianity, the  value  of  which  cannot  be  overstated.  Infidelity  must 
account  for  their  origin,  their  introduction,  their  prevalence,  and 
their  uninterrupted  continuance.  Except  upon  the  ground  of  their 
appointment  by  Divine  command,  their  hold  upon  the  mind  and 
heart  of  our  race  would  not  endure  beyond  a  single  generation. 
There  is  nothing  to  maintain  their  irresistible  sway  among  Christ- 
ians, except  their  superhuman  adaptation  to  the  wants  and  the 
necessities  of  our  condition.  That  adaptation  proclaims  their  high 
origin  and  pleads  for  their  preservation  and  perpetuity. 

Their  number  is  sufficient  to  give  form  and  visibility  to  the 
Church  of  Christ,  without  being  burdensome.  They  are  impressive 
and   suggestive  in  their  influence   upon  the  mind  and  heart,  and 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  413 

capable  of  universal  application.  In  all  the  centuries  of  their  exist- 
ence, no  complaint  has  yet  been  preferred  by  the  devout  worshiper, 
that  they  have  lost  their  freshness  or  their  meaning.  True,  the 
highest  form- of  worship  is  that  which  is  purely  spiritual,  and  to  this 
we  are  invited,  encouraged  and  urged ;  but  this  we  cannot  hope  to 
reach  until,  in  the  resurrection,  we  shall  have  undergone  that 
wondrous  change,  by  which  our  present  material  bodies  shall  be- 
come spiritual  bodies.  Until  then  they  must  needs  retain  their  con- 
fessional character,  and  continue  to  be  used  as  "  marks  of  profession 
amongst  men." 

The  Sacraments  as  Means  of  Grace. 

The  concluding  portion  of  the  paragraph  under  consideration  is 
in  these  words :  "  /;///  father  as  signs  and  evidences  of  the  ivill  of  God 
towards  us,  for  the  purpose  of  exciting  and  confirming  the  faith  of  those 
zvho  use  themi' 

The  former  use  and  purpose  they  did  truly  subserve,  and  were 
intended  to  subserve,  but  that  did  not  exhaust  the  design  of  their 
appointment.  According  to  this  statement,  they  have  their  most 
special  import  and  reference  to  the  recipient.  They  look  not  only 
to  the  visible,  external  Church,  and  supply  it  with  needful  ceremon- 
ies for  the  reception  and  recognition  of  its  members,  but  also  to  the 
spiritual  wants  and  necessities  of  the  individual  believer,  and  supply 
signs  and  evidences  (testimonies  of  God's  disposition  towards  us). 
This  brings  before  us  the  innermost  meaning  and  intent  of  these 
sacred  and  divine  institutions.  No  wonder  that  the  early  Church 
called  them  "mysteries,"  for  who  can  fathom  them? 

We  naturally  and  properly  turn  to  the  Apology,  as  the  first  au- 
thorized and  accepted  commentary  upon  the  text  of  the  Confession, 
for  explanation  of  the  sense  in  which  its  words  are  used.  To  the 
question,  how  are  we  to  interpret  the  declaration  that  the  Sacraments 
are  "signs  and  evidences  of  the  ivill  of  God  tozvards  us,"  we  have 
reply  :  "  the  Sacraments  are  not  mere  signs  *  *  *  but  effica- 
cious signs  and  sure  testimonies  of  God's  grace  and  purpose  towards 
us,  by  which  he  admonishes  and  strengthens  our  hearts  to  believe 
the  more  firmly  and  joyfully."  "  The  external  signs  were  instituted 
to  move  our  hearts,  namely,  both  by  the  word  and  the  external  signs, 
to  believe,  when  we  are  baptized,  and  when  we  receive  the  Lord's 
body,  that  God  will  be  truly  merciful  to  us,  through  Christ,  as  Paul, 


414  AUGSBURG    CONP^ESSION. 

Rom.  X.  17,  says:  ''Faith  cometh  by  hearing  y  "As  the  word  enters 
our  ears,  so  the  external  signs  are  placed  before  our  eyes,  inwardly 
to  excite  and  move  the  heart  to  faith.  The  word  and  the  external 
signs  work  the  same  thing  in  our  hearts  ;  as  Augustine  well  says : 
*  the  Sacrament  is  a  visible  word  ;'  for  the  external  sign  is  like  a  pic- 
ture, and  signifies  the  same  thing  that  is  preached  by  the  word  ; 
both,  therefore,  effect  the  same  thing."  "  The  proper  use  of  the 
Sacraments  requires  faith,  to  believe  the  divi?ie  promises  and  receive 
the  promised  grace  which  is  offered  through  the  Sacraments  and  the 
zvordy  "  The  Sacraments  are  external  signs  and  seals  of  the  prom- 
ises." "  We  should  firmly  believe  then  that  the  grace  and  remission 
of  sins,  promised  in  the  New  Testament,  are  imparted  to  us." 

These  quotations  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Confession  de- 
signs to  represent  the  Sacraments  as  signs  and  evidences  of  God's 
purpose  to  pardon  sin,  to  nurture  gr^ce,  and  to  bestow  salvation. 
They  are  signs  not  of  our  condition  before  God,  or  of  our  disposition 
toward  God,  but  of  his  disposition  and  of  his  purposes  of  grace 
towards  us. 

After  most  carefully  and  honestly  tracing  the  developments  of  the 
views  of  Luther  upon  this  subject,  the  learned  and  reliable  Dr. 
Dorner,  of  Berlin,*  concludes  his  representation  of  the  position  to 
which  the  great  reformer  was  conducted  as  follows:  "  The  signs,  and 
even  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  do  not  give  something  specially 
contained  in  them,  which  is  not  to  be  had  otherwise ;  but  they  are 
only  the  sealing  form,  the  pledge  of  the  gift,  by  which  the  substance 
of  the  blessing,  which  lies  in  the  word  of  promise,  even  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Holy  Supper,  may  become  the  sooner  fixed  and  be 
the  more  certain.  But  the  substance  itself  is  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 
The  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  not  properly  in  themselves  re- 
garded as  the  gift  which  is  the  object  of  the  Holy  Supper,  but  they 
are  only  the  means  of  assurance,  divine  and  holy  pledges  of  the 
proper  gift,  namely  o{  the  forgiveness  of  sins  ivitli  which  life  and  sal- 
vation are  connected.  This  then  is  the  doctrine  to  which  Luther 
continued  essentially  to  adhere,  and  which  has  become  peculiar  to 
the  Lutheran  Church.  The  Holy  Supper  is,  according  to  this  form 
of  doctrine,  a  promise  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  confirmed  by  signs 
or  seals,  wherein  not  merely  bread  and  wine,  but  even  and  emphati- 

*  History  of  Prot.  Theol.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  158. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  415 

cally  the  present  body  and'  blood  of  Christ,  form  the  pledge;  and 
this  in  such  a  way,  that  faith  receives  the  same  matter  both  in  and 
outside  of  the  Sacrament,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  only  in  the  Holy 
Supper  with  special  external  certification  by  means  of  the  God-given 
pledge.  To  this  the  LjitJieran  Confessions  adJiere.  Apol.  201 :  Idem 
effectus  est  verbi  ct  ritus,  after  Augustine's  language,  Sacramentum 
esse  verbum  visibile,  quia  ritus  est  quasi  pictura  verbi,  idem  signifi- 
cans  quod  verbum,  quare  idem  est  utriusque  effectus." 

From  this  we  anticipate  no  dissent,  as  of  it  we  believe  no  positive 
denial  can  be  sustained.  We  may,  therefore,  proceed  to  enumerate 
and  describe  the  things  signified  and  indicated  in  the  two  Christian 
Sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 

These  Sacraments,  in  their  external  symbols,  are  designed  to 
exhibit  the  blessing  of  God's  covenant,  and  to  shadow  forth  the 
benefits  of  redemption.  The  one  ordinance  meets  the  believer  at 
the  very  threshold  of  the  Church,  and  by  its  simple  but  significant 
ceremony,  indicates  the  character  which  alone  fits  for  worthy  mem- 
bership therein  ;  the  other  attends  him,  with  its  equally  appropriate 
service,  throughout  his  entire  pilgrimage,  furnishing  ever  the  needed 
evidence  of  sustaining  grace,  and  witnessing  anew  the  presence  of 
the  risen  Lord.  The  lessons  they  teach  are  invaluable,  the  influence 
they  exert  is  most  blessed. 

As  Baptism  presents  its  water,  it  reveals  the  moral  and  spiritual 
filth  which  demands  cleansing,  that  we  may  become  acceptable  to 
God  and  fitted  for  fellowship  with  him,  and  already  promises  the 
renewing  power  which  attends  the  added  word  and  accompanying 
Spirit.  What  could  more  aptly  point  out  "'the  tvasJiing  of  regenera- 
tion and  renezving  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  is  shed  abundantly 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  on  all  who  are  saved  according  to 
his  mercy?  Was  not  the  same  prophetically  seen  by  the  prophet  of 
Chebar,  when  he  writes  in  anticipation  of  this  ordinance  and  of  its 
high  import:  "The7i  zvill  I  sprifikle  clean  zuater  npon  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean?"  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25.  Baptism  is  therefore  justly  a  sign 
of  spiritual  renewal,  by  which  its  recipient  is  fitted  for  the  salvation 
and  entitled  to  all  the  benefits  of  the  Covenant,  i  Titus  iii.  5. 

Neither  is  the  Lord's  Supper  an  unmeaning  ceremony.  It  too 
has  its  mode  of  administration  and  its  necessary  emblems.  Its  con- 
secrated bread  and  wine  most  strikingly  portray  the  broken  body 
and  the  shed   blood  of  the  Redeemer.     "  The  cup  of  blessing  zvhich 


41  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

zve  Mess,  is  it  not  the  Coimmtnion  of  tlie  blood  of  Clifist?  The  bread 
which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  Communion  of  the  body  of  Christ  ?  I 
Cor.  X.  i6.  "As  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread,  and  drink  this  cup,  ye 
do  show  the  Lord's  death  till  he  come."  i  Cor.  xi.  26.  Each  new 
celebration  of  this  ordinance  is  a  most  positive  and  emphatic  re- 
declaration of  the  chiefest  doctrines  and  revelations  of  the  Christian 
religion.  In  its  commemoration  of  the  death  of  its  Founder  it  re- 
asserts the  sin  and  ruin  of  our  race,  making  such  sacrifice  a  necessity. 
It  re-echoes  the  righteous  indignation  of  a  holy  God  against  all  evil- 
doers and  transgressors.  It  unfolds  the  infinite  resources  of  the 
Almighty  in  being  able  to  provide  a  way  of  reconciling  the  conflict- 
ing demands  of  judgment  and  mercy.  It  sends  forth  anew  the 
superhuman  prayer:  ''Fatlier,  forgive  them,  for  they  knoiv  not  what 
they  do ;"  heard  alike  on  earth  and  in  heaven,  which,  that  it  might 
be  answered,  forced  that  other  cry,  which  still  makes  angels  wonder 
and  mortals  adore,  *'My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  meT^ 
It  affords  the  truest  fulfilment  of  the  Saviour's  own  most  gracious 
words,  ''God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  shojild  not  perish  but  have  everlasting 
life."  In  that  it  places  in  the  hand  of  each  participant  the  appointed 
emblems,  and  bids  each  one,  ''take,  eat;''  "drink  ye  all  of  this,"  the 
personal  acceptance  of  every  one,  who  receives  it  with  faith  in  the 
promises  which  are  exhibited  and  set  forth,  is  reassured.  In  that  all 
who  believe  and  are  gathered  together  in  one  place  are  cordially 
invited  to  unite  in  this  observance,  there  is  exhibited  alike  the  duty 
and  reality  of  "the  Communion  of  Saints,"  true  type  of  that  more 
blessed  fellowship  which  will  be  eternal  and  complete  in  the  world 
to  come.  In  that  the  design  and  efficacy  of  Christ's  sacrificial  offer- 
ing in  our  stead  and  in  our  behalf  are  ever  thrust  upon  the  eye,  by 
this  visible  word,  and  upon  the  ear  by  the  spoken  word,  in  this 
grand  sacramental  communion,  there  is  uttered  to  the  soul  the  glad 
assurance  that  we  are  pardoned  and  saved  through  grace  divine; 
and  in  that  this  festival  has  been  appointed  to  continue  to  the  end 
of  this  dispensation,  we,  by  it,  do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  until 
he  come,  and  thus  keep  alive  the  remembrance  and  the  expectation 
of  his  "appearing  the  second  time  zvithoiit  sin  Jinto  salvation;  to  be 
glorified  in  his  saints,  and  to  be  admired  in  all  them  that  believe !'  In 
a  word,  the  whole  gospel  history  culminates  in  the  transactions 
commemorated  in  the  Lord's  Supper.     The  great  truths  of  revela- 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACKAMENTS.  4I7 

tion  and  redemption  centre  around  the  cross,  and  as  in  these  alone 
we  can  adequately  discover  the  will  of  God  toward  us,  Christ  has 
graciously  left  in  his  Church  this  rite,  that  with  its  co-ordinate  Sac- 
rament of  Baptism,  it  might  testify  to  us  of  his  gracious  intentions 
to  bestow  his  promised  blessings  and  fulfil  his  covenanted  engage- 
ments. 

Dr.  Dorner  unfolds  the  workings  of  Luther's  mind  upon  this 
point  as  follows :  "  Whilst  the  zvord  of  God  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  is 
thus  established  as  the  means  of  grace  in  general,  grace  assumes  in 
the  Sacrauiciits,  on  the  other  hand,  a  form  having  reference  still 
more  immediately  to  the  individual  person,  as  living  in  a  specified 
time  and  space.  It  is  an  expression  of  Luther's,  in  reference  to  this, 
as  frequent  as  it  is  singularly  descriptive,  that  God  "deals  with  us  " 
(mit  uns  handle)  through  the  means  of  grace." 

"  It  does  not  satisfy  the  vital  religious  need,  as  it  expresses  itself 
in  Luther,  to  know  of  a  divine  decree  of  salvation,  whether  concern- 
ing the  individual  person,  or  concerning  the  past,  even  although 
eternaly  valid,  work  of  atonement;  but  the  soul  of  the  pious  longs 
after  the  living  God,  and  hence  requires  not  merely  past  history  or 
eternal  decrees,  but  also  deeds  of  love  on  the  part  of  God,  which  as 
it  were,  renew  their  youth,  the  present  glance  of  love  and  greeting 
from  above."* 

Two-fold  Use  of  the  Sacraments. 

But  the  article  under  investigation  represents  the  use  of  the  Sacra- 
ments as  two-fold,  designed  not  only  to  serve  "  as  signs  and  evi- 
dences of  the  will  of  God  towards  us,"  but  also  "for  the  purpose  of 
exciting  and  confirnnng  the  faith  of  those  ivho  use  thejny 

So  admirably  conceived  and  happily  adjusted  are  they,  that  they 
accomplish  this  double  office  most  successfully.  They  unfold  God's 
grace  and  favor,  by  the  manifestation  of  the  truth  concerning  the 
divine  will  and  covenant,  and  in  response  they  invite  and  encourage 
implicit  reliance  upon  the  divine  promises.  They  show  the  claim 
of  God's  word  upon  us,  the  security  of  the  foundation  upon  which 
our  faith  is  to  rest,  and  the  blessed  results  it  will  effect. 

It  is  true,  "faith  conieth  by  heari)ig,"  but  the  faith  so  wrought  by 
the  preached  word  needs  to  be  nourished  and  fed,  so  as  to  be  pre- 

*Hist.  of  Prot.  Theology,  Vol.  I.,  p.  147. 


41  8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

served,  strengthened  and  perfected,  as  the  Apostles  prayed,  ''Lord, 
increase  ojir  faitJi!' 

Faith  is  a  hving,  vital  power,  and  like  every  other  form  of  life  on 
earth,  is  capable  of  growth,  under  favorable  conditions,  and  so,  also, 
is  subject  to  injury  and  destruction  by  adverse  influences,  as  St. 
Paul  says  (i  Tim.  i.  19):  "Some  concerning  faith  iiave  made  ship- 
wreck.'" The  Sacraments  are  not  represented  in  this  Article  of  the 
Confession  as  bestowing  or  conferring  faith  in  its  beginnings,  but  as 
stirring  up  and  confirming  that  which  has  been  already  established. 

We  cannot  advance  very  far,  in  an  examination  of  the  symbols 
and  authors  of  our  Church  upon  the  subject  of  the  Sacraments,  be- 
fore we  become  convinced  XSxsX  faitli  is  made  the  condition  of  their 
true  benefit  and  efficacy.  Under  the  long  neglect  and  perversion  of 
the  dark  ages,  the  moral  condition  of  the  participant  was  entirely 
disregarded,  and  the  full  advantages  of  the  Church's  ordinances 
were  put  unconditionally,  sine  bono  motn  ntentis,  at  the  disposal  of 
the  administrator.  From  this  the  Reformers  dissented  in  the  most 
positive  manner. 

As  early  as  the  year  15  18,  Luther  declares  the  leading  principle 
to  be :  "  Whatever  may  be  the  case  zvitli  the  Sacraments,  faith  must 
maintain  its  rights  and  honors"  :  *  *  ''that  without  faith  no 
blessing  can  come  to  a  man  from  the  Sacrament :  "  *  *  '"that  the 
Sacraments  do  not  effect  the  grace  which  they  signify ;  not  the 
Sacrament,  but  faith  in  it,  justifies ;  it  purifies,  not  because  it  takes 
place,  but  because  it  is  believed  {iwn  sacramentum,  sed  fides  sacra- 
menti,  ju  stifle  at ;  abluit  sacramentum  non  quia  fit,  sed  quia  creditur)  ; 
*  *  "  that  faith  may  also  receive,  apart  from  the  Sacrament,  the 
same  thing  as  in  the  Sacrament,  namely,  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
(through  faith  in  the  word)."* 

In  the  Apology  (VII.,  18,)  it  is  affirmed,  "We  teach  \S\dX. faith  is 
necessary  to  the  proper  use  of  the  Sacraments ;  a  faith  which  believes 
the  promises  and  receives  the  things  promised,  which  are  here 
offered  in  the  Sacrament.  And  the  reason  of  this  is  plain  and  un- 
deniable. A  promise  is  useless  to  us,  unless  it  is  embraced  by  faith. 
But  the  Sacraments  are  signs  of  the  promises,  therefore  faith  is 
necessary  to  their  proper  use." 

In  perfect  harmony  with  this  representation  are  the  views  of  the 

*See  Dorner,  Vol.  I.,  151. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  4I9 

leading  Lutheran  theologians  unto  the  present  day.  Out  of  the 
many  at  hand,  we  cite  but  a  few.  Chentnitz  (Ex.  C.  Trid.,  II.  36) : 
"The  instrumental  cause  in  this  doctrine  is  two-fold;  one  is,  as  it 
were,  the  hand  of  God,  by  which,  through  the  word  and  Sacraments, 
He  offers,  presents,  applies,  and  seals  the  benefits  of  redemption  to 
believers.  The  other  is,  as  it  were,  our  hand,  by  which  we  in  faith 
ask,  apprehend  and  receive  those  things  which  God  offers  to  us 
through  the  w^rd  and  Sacraments.  The  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments 
is  not  such  as  though  through  them  God  infused,  and  as  it  were,  im- 
pressed grace  and  sal\-ation,  even  on  unbelievers  or  believers." 
Hollazius  (1061) :  "  Faitli  is  necessarily  required  in  order  to  the  recep- 
tion of  the  salutary  efficacy  of  the  Sacrajiienty  "  The  Sacraments 
confer  no  grace  on  adults,  unless  when  offered  they  receive  it  by 
\.rv\e  faith,  ivhich  existed  in  their  Jiearts  previously." 

Nor  need  we  wonder  that  such  prominence  and  emphasis  are 
given  to  the  matter  o^  faith  in  its  relations  to  the  Sacraments,  or 
that  this  Article  concludes  with  a  condemnation  of  the  opposite 
theory: 

"  They  therefore  condemn  those  zvlio  teach  that  the  Sacraments 
justify  {ex  opere  operato)  by  the  mere  performance  of  the  act,  and  zvho 
do  not  teach  that  fai,h  ivhicJi  believes  our  sins  to  be  forgiven,  is  re- 
quired in  the  use  of  the  Sacraments." 

Protestantism  versus  Romanism. 

A  very  little  reflection  will,  we  believe,  make  it  manifest  that  the 
gist  of  the  controversy  between  Protestantism  and  Romanism 
centres  in  this  point. 

Its  interpretation  decides  the  question  of  the  way  of  salvation. 
It  cannot  be  denied  that  two  opposite  theories  are  held,  and  that 
they  are  conflicting,  antagonistic,  irreconcilable,  and  mutually  de- 
structive of  each  other.  There  is  no  one  point  where  they  approxi- 
mate so  closely  as  to  merge  imperceptibly  into  one  another.  Nar- 
rowness, shallowness,  ignorance,  and  blind  partisan  zeal  have  often, 
must  we  not  say  always,  deceived  and  misled  the  unthinking  so  as 
to  cause  them  to  lift  into  undue  prominence  matters  comparatively 
unimportant,  and  to  display  embittered  hostility  over  questions  of 
taste,  of  modes,  of  measures,  or  of  men.  True,  everything  pertain- 
ing to  religion  is  important,  but  everything  is  not  equally  religious 
or  equally  important.     But  neither  skill,  nor  conciliation,  nor  cordi- 


420  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ality,  nor  charity,  nor  expediency,  nor  explanation,  nor  admission, 
nor  silence,  nor  all  these  combined,  can  bridge  the  chasm  between 
that  familiarly  known  as  the  ex  opere  operato  theory,  and  that  of 
Faith,  as  taught  in  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  held  in  the 
Church  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  in  the  Reformed  Church 
at  large.  It  is  not  a  question  of  degrees,  or  of  probabilities,  or  of 
preferences,  or  of  historical  development,  but  of  scriptural  represen- 
tation, of  theological  dogma,  of  divine  truth.  Are  we  saved  by  faith 
through  grace,  or  are  we  saved  by  the  Sacraments  through  the 
Church?  Or,  as  it  is  sometimes  stated,  do  we  come  to  Christ 
through  the  Church,  or  do  we  come  to  the  Church  through 
Christ?*  We  claim  that  this  presentation  is  neither  fanciful  nor 
unfair;  and  if  some  object  who  hold  the  theory,  but  who  do  not  like 
either  the  name  or  the  organization  of  the  papal  hierarchy,  we  can 
only  add  that  by  adopting  the  doctrinal  tenets  and  the  sacramental 
theory  of  Rome,  they  have  already  obliterated  all  distinctive  pecu- 
liarities, and  are  now  separated  from  her  only  in  name. 

The  blessed  Saviour  saw  fit  to  defer  the  institution  of  the  Sacra- 
ments until  he  had  reached  the  very  close  of  his  earthly  ministry. 
We  cannot  regard  this  as  unintentional  or  circumstantial.  Had 
they  been  necessary  to  the  attainment  of  faith,  or  more  important 
and  influential  than  the  spoken  word,  he  would  have  placed  them  at 
the  very  beginning  of  his  work,  and  thus  have  afforded  his  disciples 
the  full  benefits  they  would  have  conferred.  The  only  means  of 
grace  they  had,  apart  from  the  sacrificial  observances  of  Judaism, 
was  that  of  the  word,  and  this  was  deemed  enough. 

In  Protestant  theology,  tJie  word  assumes,  and  must  ever  maintain 
the  first  place  in  enumerating  the  means  of  grace.  It  stands  before 
the  Sacraments,  not  in  the  order  of  importance  or  of  intrinsic  value, 
as  though  one  were  to  be  balanced  against  the  other,  for  they  cannot 
thus  be  rightly  compared  or  contrasted;  but  in  the  order  of  time, 
for  the  word  was  first  spoken,  and  is  ever  the  first  in  its  agency  in 
building  up  the  believer  in  a  life  of  true  godliness.  The  word  pro- 
claims Christ  as  "  tJie  way,  the  truih,  and  the  lifey  The  Holy  Spirit 
ever  attends  and  accompanies  its  declaration,  and  if  we  may  so 
speak,  the  sacramental  grace  of  the  preached  word  leads  to  faith, 
saving  faith,  not  a  mere  historic  belief,  but  that  faith  which  follows 


*See  Church  and  Christ,  Litton,  159. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS,  42 1 

repentance  and  precedes  salvation.  Then  and  there  are  the  place, 
and  the  value,  and  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  to  be  recognized 
and  acknowledged.  Rome,*  in  contrast  with  the  Bible,  elevates  the 
Sacraments  above  the  word  in  her  estimate  of  the  means  of  grace; 
the  Greek  Church,  in  conflict  with  it,  hardly  regards  the  word  as  a 
means  of  grace;  whilst  in  the  Scriptures  it  is  to  the  word  that  most 
frequent  reference  is  made  when  speaking  of  the  agency  by  which 
man's  salvation  is  secured.  The  Sacraments  demand  for  their 
proper  and  profitable  reception  suited  and  adequate  spiritual  prepar- 
ation, as  they  claim  and  proclaim  corresponding  fitness  and  attain- 
ment in  all  their  participants.  But  how  shall  this  be  secured,  if  faith 
be  not  made  to  precede?  "Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  with  the 
word  of  truth."  "Being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of 
incorruptible  by  the  word  of  God,  which  liveth  and  abideth  forever." 
Nothing  can  be  clearer  than  that  in  every  case  of  adult  admission  to 
the  initiative  rite  of  Baptism,  as  recorded  in  the  New  Testament, 
repentance  and  faith  are  either  declared  or  implied.  The  word,  re- 
ceived by  faith  and  applied  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  the  only  true 
preparation  for  the  reception  of  the  blessings  belonging  to  the  Sac- 
raments. These  blessings  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  consisting  in 
mere  external  relations  secured  by  our  connection  with  the  Church, 
and  because  of  which  God's  favor  is  to  be  enjoyed,  but  they  are  to 
be  found  in  a  new  heart  and  a  right  life,  delivered  from  the  power 
and  service  of  evil  and  consecrated  unto  God.  These  can  only  be 
secured  through  personal  union  with  Christ,  through  faith  in  his 
name.  Mere  participation  in  the  Sacraments  without  faith,  i.  e., 
without  the  character  and  life  which  faith  works  in  us,  will  not  avail 
for  our  growth  in  grace  (for  that  cannot  grow  which  has  not  yet 
been  born),  nor  for  our  acceptance  and  salvation. 

The  theory  condemned  in  the  Confession  practically  and  virtually 
teaches  the  very  reverse  of  this.  With  it,  the  Church  consists  of 
all,  irrespective  of  moral  or  religious  character,  renewed  or  unre- 
newed, who  are  in  external  formal  connection  with  it;  and  that  the 
blessings  of  union  with  Christ,  with  all  that  belongs  thereto,  and 
flows  therefrom,  are  assured  and  secured  through  the  sole  agency 
of  the  Sacraments,  and  that  access  to  Christ  is  obtained  through 
the  intervening  agency  of  the  Church. 

*  See  Van  Oosterzee,  Christian  Dogmatics,  Vol.  H.,  740. 
28 


42  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Even  where  Romanism  admits  the  need  of  personal  hoHness  to 
the  attainment  of  salvation,  it  looks  for,  as  is  done  by  Bellarmine, 
in  his  discussions  on  the  Sacraments,  the  renewing  and  sanctifying 
of  the  soul,  not  to  the  word  and  the  Spirit,  but  to  the  Church  and 
the  Sacraments.*  It  regards  the  Church  as  a  visible  institution, 
with  complete  apparatus  and  machinery  for  saving  souls.  It  meets 
all  alike  with  the  offer  and  the  requirement  of  Baptism,  by  which  it 
not  only  professes  and  promises  to  secure  union  with  Christ,  but 
also  to  provide  and  bestow  sacramental  grace,  i.  e.  spiritual  power 
and  life  to  discharge  subsequent  duty.  It  then  presents  the  Sacra- 
ment of  Confirmation,  by  which  it  fully  equips  for  the  spiritual  war- 
fare upon  which  the  recipient  enters.  The  Eucharist  is  then  reached 
with  its  declared  ex  opere  opcrato  efficacy,  feeding  and  nourishing 
with  Christ's  body  and  blood  all  who  interpose  no  positive  bar  (non 
ponentibus  obicem).  For  those  who  have  fallen,  there  is  in  readi- 
ness the  very  convenient  sacrament  of  Penance,  whose  restoring 
virtue  never  fails  in  the  hour  of  need.  Thus  is  there  provision  for 
every  emergency  of  life,  and  so  is  there  also  for  death.  The  Sacra- 
ment oi  Extreme  Unction  places  in  his  hand  a  passport  to  the  eternal 
world,  issued  by  the  order  and  with  the  seal  of  the  Church  upon  it. 
But  eternal  life  is  not  yet  bestowed.  Confessing  that  this  ex  opere 
operato  theory  does  not  necessarily  work  moral  changes  or  neces- 
sarily secure  oneness  with  Christ  and  fitness  for  heaven,  there  is 
placed,  somewhere  between  the  grave  and  glory,  the  Sacrament  of 
Purgatory  for  completing  and  perfecting  the  preparation  of  the  soul 
for  its  final  and  unchanging  condition. 

There  is  in  this  arrangement,  most  surely,  the  merit  of  complete- 
ness. Should  it  ever  fail  in  achieving  its  professed  object,  it  cannot 
be  for  want  of  instrumentality. 

Council  of  Trent  on  the  Sacraments. 
At  the  seventh  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  held  March  3, 
A.  D.  1547,  action  was  taken  upon  the  subject  of  "  The  Sacraments 
in  general!'  Thirteen  Canons  were  passed,  as  set  forth  in  the 
preface,  "  in  order  to  destroy  the  errors  and  to  extirpate  the  heresies 
which  have  appeared  in  these  our  days  on  the  subject  of  the  said 
most  holy  Sacraments,  as  well  those  which  have  been  revived  from 

*  See  Hodge's  Systematic  Theology,  Vol.  III.,  511. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.,  423 

the  heresies  condemned  of  old  by  our  fathers,  as  also  those  newly- 
invented,  and  which  are  exceedingly  prejudicial  to  the  purity  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  to  the  salvation  of  souls." 

In  the  first  of  these  it  is  "  established  and  decreed"  that  the  Sac- 
raments were  instituted  by  Christ,  that  they  are  neither  more  nor 
less  than  seven,  and  an  anathema  is  discharged  at  any  one  who  may 
be  so  daring  and  wicked  as  to  declare  "  that  any  one  of  these  seven 
is  not  truly  and  properly  a  Sacrament."  Was  not  that  cannon  most 
effectually  spiked  by  Chemnitz  in  his  illustrious  Examenf  It  has 
harmed  no  Protestant  theologian  since  then. 

Anathemas,  like  cannon  balls  in  a  citadel,  were  provided  in  great 
abundance,  and  with  the  adoption  of  each  successive  Canon,  one 
was  hurled  at  the  head  of  any  unbelieving  dissenter. 

Canon  II.  sets  forth  the  difference  between  the  Sacraments  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments. 

Canon  III.  declares  that  these  seven  Sacraments  are  not  all  of 
equal  value. 

Canon  IV.  affirms  that  these  Sacraments  are  necessary  unto  sal- 
vation; that  the  grace  of  justificatibn  cannot  be  obtained  without 
them,  although  all  the  Sacraments  are  not  necessary  for  every  indi- 
vidual. 

Canon  V.  anathematizes  any  one  who  may  say  that  these  Sacra- 
ments were  instituted  for  the  sake  of  nourishing  faith  alone. 

Canon  VI.  reads  as  follows:  "  If  any  one  saith  that  the  Sacra- 
ments of  the  New  Law  do  not  contain  the  grace  which  they  sig- 
nify ;  or,  that  they  do  not  confer  that  grace  on  those  who  do  not 
place  an  obstacle  thereunto;  as  though  they  were  merely  outward 
signs  of. grace  or  justice  received  through  faith,  and  certain  marks 
of  the  Christian  profession,  whereby  believers  are  distinguished 
amongst  men  from  unbelievers:  let  him  be  anathema." 

Canon  VII.  is  distinctive:  "  If  any  saith  that  grace,  as  far  as 
God's  part  is  concerned,  is  not  given  through  the  said  Sacraments, 
always  and  to  all  men,  even  though  they  receive  them  rightly,  but 
(only)  sometimes  and  to  some  persons:   let  him  be  anathema." 

Canon  VIII.  is  also  worthy  of  quotation :  "  If  any  one  saith  that 
by  the  said  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  grace  is  not  conferred 
through  the  act  performed,  but  that  faith  alone  in  the  divine  promise 
suffices  for  the  obtaining  of  grace:  let  him  be  anathema." 

Canon  IX.  asserts  that  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  Orders  imprint 


424  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

upon  the  soul  certain  indelible  signs,  on  account  of  which  they  can- 
not be  repeated. 

Canon  X.  affirms  that  all  Christians  have  not  power  to  adminster 
the  word  and  the  Sacraments. 

Canon  XI.  declares  that  when  ministers  effect  and  confer  the  Sac- 
raments, the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does  is  required. 

Canon  XII.  teaches  that  though  a  minister  be  in  mortal  sin,  yet 
if  he  observe  all  the  essentials  which  belong  to  the  effecting  or  con- 
ferring of  the  Sacrament,  he  effects  and  confers  the  Sacrament. 

Canon  XIII.  says  that  the  received  and  approved  rites  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  used  in  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  may 
not  be  contemned,  or  omitted,  or  changed,  without  sin. 

A  more  interesting,  important,  or  timely  study,  than  that  which 
these  thirteen  Canons  invite  and  demand,  enters  not  into  a  theolog- 
ical course,  nor  arises  in  the  longest  pastorate.  Conflicting  opinions 
and  theories  have  prevailed,  and  no  doubt  will  prevail  so  long  as 
Sacraments  exist.  The  Church  ever  has  observed  and  doubtless 
ever  will  observe  these  external  ordinances.  The  questions  of 
grace  and  salvation  stand  in  closest  connection  therewith.  Indiffer- 
ence, either  for  theologians  or  pastors,  is  impossible.  Through 
them  the  faith  and  the  life  of  Christians  are  expressed.  There  is 
possibility,  if  not  danger,  for  censurable  and  destructive  extremes, 
as  the  charges  and  denunciations  of  each  age  and  tendency  make 
apparent.  Let  there  be  too  objective  and  materialistic  a  conception 
entertained,  reducing  the  appliances  of  the  Church  to  the  low  posi- 
tion of  being  a  mere  religious  machinery,  working  its  results  neces- 
sarily and  by  the  mere  act  performed,  severing  the  appointed  connec- 
tion between  morality  and  religion,  there  will  be  outcry  loud  and 
long,  and  they  who  persist  therein  must  do  so  against  the  most 
earnest  protest,  and  the  most  cogent  reasoning,  of  an  alarmed  and 
indignant  Church.  Should  there  be,  on  the  other  hand,  too  violent 
a  rebound,  should  there  be  too  low  a  value  placed  upon  the  existing 
and  established  rites  of  the  Church,  should  they  be  shorn  of  all  their 
credited  efficiency,  and  be  regarded  simply  as  suggestive  ceremonies, 
by  which  to  make  out  and  distinguish  Christians  and  stimulate  their 
spiritual  sensibilities,  as  the  rainbow  in  the  heavens,  or  the  memorial 
stones  of  the  Jordan,  or  the  pictures  in  our  churches,  there  will  again 
be  most  righteous  indignation  provoked,  and  believers  will  demand 
the  respect  and  appreciation  due  to  institutions  of  this  high  char- 
acter. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  425 

Against  both  these  false  and  dangerous  positions  has  the  Church 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  been  compelled  to  bear  witness. 
Guided  alone  by  the  sure  and  infallible  word  of  God,  it  has  taken  its 
position  advisedly  and  firmly,  protesting  alike  against  Rome  and 
Rationalism,  against  excluding  Christ  from  his  own  Church  by  the 
substitution  of  Sacraments  ^multiplied  at  will,  and  the  distorted  in- 
terpretation or  unbelieving  neglect  of  his  solemn  commands  and 
appointments. 

Stimulated  by  the  zeal,  ability  and  achievements  of  the  Reformers, 
and,  as  is  most  likely,  with  *  the  original  (German)  copy  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  before  them  for  examination  and  refutation, 
the  enraged  and  indignant  Doctors  and  theologians  at  Trent  form- 
ulated their  conclusions  in  the  Canons  just  recited.  Therein  they 
clearly  declare  and  maintain  that  the  Sacraments  contain  the  grace 
which  they  signify  ;  that  they  confer  grace  ex  opcre  opcrato,  by  the 
mere  act,  upon  such  as  do  not  put  an  obstruction  by  mortal  sin;  that 
the  Sacraments  are  equally  efficacious  in  accomplishing  their  de- 
signed end — "  for  these  sensible  and  natural  things,"  it  is  declared, 
"  work  by  the  almighty  power  of  God  in  the  Sacraments  what  they 
could  not  do  by  their  own  power;"  that  faith  in  the  recipient  in  order 
to  his  experiencing  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  is  not  necessary  ; 
that  all  that  is  necessary  in  the  administrator  is  the  intention  of  doing 
what  the  Church  designs  to  be  done. 

Ex  Opere  Operato. 
Much  has  grown  out  of  the  declaration  that  the  Sacraments  have 
an  ex  opcre  operato  efficacy,  for  much  is  contained  therein.  Roman- 
ists and  Protestants  have  explained  and  expounded  until  what  in 
itself  is  plain  enough  and  easily  understood,  has  become  much  ob- 
scured. There  need  be  no  difficulty,  however,  in  arriving  at  a  posi- 
tive understanding.  There  is  here  propounded  and  affirmed  what 
had  been  so  relentlessly  condemned  in  the  thirteenth  Article  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession.  Over  against  that  Article  they  design,  and 
make  clear  their  design,  to  say  that  the  Sacraments  when  duly  ad- 
ministered invariably  produce  the  intended  results,  irrespective  of 
the  moral  character  of  the  recipient.  They  are  sufficient  in  them- 
selves, and  we  need  not  look  beyond  them  for  the  effect  produced. 


*  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  I.,  p.  237. 


426  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

It  would  be  an  easy  task  to  bring  together  the  masterly  utterances 
of  Lutheran  and  Reformed  theologians  in  reply  to  this  assumption. 
We  will  not  lengthen  this  article  by  such  quotations,  however  inter- 
esting and  valuable  they  might  prove.  The  line  of  argumentation 
we  will  briefly  indicate.  Not  only  is  it  affirmed  that  it  lacks  au- 
thority from  the  sacred  scriptures,  which  is  in  itself  an  indispensable 
requisite  and  a  most  damaging  defect,  but  that  it  is  absolutely  un- 
scriptural,  being  in  conflict  with  the  Bible  in  its  representation  of 
saving  grace,  as  dependent  upon  a  Sacrament  and  not  upon  faith. 

Then  again  it  is  urged  against  this  theory,  that  it  debases  the 
ordinances  of  divint  appointment,  intended  to  influence  the  mind 
and  control  the  affections,  into  a  mere  physical  law,  with  no  other 
recommendation  than  that  it  will  unfailingly  operate  as  a  magical 
charm.  The  Sacraments  are  thus  degraded  to  the  level  of  heathen 
ignorance  and  superstition.  It  is  also  affirmed  of  this  priestly  device, 
that  it  is  of  immoral  tendency,  as  nothing  short  of  mortal  sin  can 
constitute  a  sufficient  bar  against  the  reception  of  the  grace  signified 
and  conveyed  by  the  Sacraments. 

Another  most  serious  and  immovable  objection  is  found  in  the 
fact,  that  whatever  may  be  the  design  or  the  desire,  the  need  or  the 
qualifications  of  the  recipient,  it  conditions  the  efficacy  and  the 
blessings  of  the  Sacraments,  entirely  upon  the  intention  of  the 
administrators.  For  reasons  like  these  we  reject  and  repudiate  this 
whole  conception  as  alike  unscriptural,  unreasonable,  unnatural, 
and  unsatisfactory. 

Later  Dogmatic  Views. 

The  requirements  of  this  occasion  impose  the  obligation,  not 
simply  to  use  the  Article  under  examination  as  a  text  for  an  isolated 
discourse,  as  the  homiletician  employs  a  passage  of  scripture,  but 
in  addition,  under  its  lead,  to  trace  the  influence  it  has  had  in  form- 
ing and  controlling  the  theology  of  the  Church  in  subsequent  times. 
We  may,  in  some  sense,  regard  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  a  germ, 
which,  endowed  with  spiritual  vitality,  must  continually  increase  and 
grow  until  it  has  reached  its  utmost  dimensions.  It  was  indeed  an 
imperishable  and  indestructible  bud,  which  has  opened  and  ex- 
panded into  a  most  beautiful  and  fragrant  flower.  Yet  it  must  ever 
be  regarded  as  the  work  of  uninspired  and  fallible  men,  who  them- 
selves acknowledge  no  human  authority  as  final,  and  who  are  most 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  427 

honored,  not  when  their  utterances  are  credulously  accepted,  but 
when  they  are  thoroughly  examined  and  diligently  compared  with 
the  word  of  God.  To  this  their  successors  and  followers  are  ever 
urged,  not  only  by  their  example,  but  also  by  their  precept. 

The  history  of  Dogmatics  in  the  Lutheran  Church,  reveals  the 
existence  of  a  difference  in  the  mode  of  stating  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments.  There  may  not  be  in  it  as  much  as  at  first  appears,  but 
unquestionably  the  representations  of  our  later  theologians  must  be 
regarded  not  only  as  fuller,  but  as  stronger.  Dr.  Heinrich  Schmid, 
of  Erlangen,  in  his  admirable  and  indispensable  work,  ''The  Doc- 
trmal  TJieology  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church','  presents  the 
matter  at  considerable  length,  and  with  fairness  and  discrimination. 
"When  we  compare  the  views  of  the  earlier  dogmaticians  with 
those  of  the  more  modern,  we  find  their  difference  to  consist  in  this, 
that  the  earlier  dogmaticians  are  solely  concerned  to  prove  the 
analogy  of  the  word  and  Sacraments,  as  the  two  means  of  salvation, 
according  to  which  in  the  one  case,  evangelical  grace  is  communi- 
cated by  the  word,  and  in  the  other  by  the  external,  visible  sign. 
In  this  view,  however,  there  is  no  notice  taken  of  the  fact,  that 
above  all  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  besides  grace,  there  is  something  in 
addition  present  and  communicated,  viz.,  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ.  The  later  theologians,  on  the  other  hand,  keep  this  partic- 
ularly in  view,  that  even  if  by  the  Sacraments,  as  well  as  by  the 
word,  the  grace  of  salvation  (/.  e.  conversion,  justification,  regenera- 
tion, etc.)  is  conferred,  yet  that  this  grace  is  not  the  first  and  proxi- 
mate object  conferred  in  the  Sacraments,  as  it  is  in  the  word,  but 
that  in  the  Sacraments  there  is  something  else  which  precedes  it, 
(in  the  Lord's  Supper,  body  and  blood),  the  design  of  which  is  to 
impart  saving  grace.  It  is  this,  then,  that  they  mean  to  convey  by 
the  general  expression,  materia  ccelestis,  applicable  to  both  Sacra- 
ments, but  it  is  difficult  for  them  to  show  the  materia  ccelestis  in 
Baptism,  in  the  same  way  as  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  And  in  this 
view  of  the  subject,  the  force  of  the  analogy  also  between  a  Sacra- 
ment and  the  word,  as  the  two  means  of  salvation,  is  weakened. 
In  assuming  a  materia  ccelestis,  they  assumed  also  a  particular  union 
of  the  materia  ccelestis  et  terrestis." 

The  manner  of  this  union  is  stated  by  Quenstedt  (IV\,  75)  as  fol- 
lows :  "  As  a  Sacrament  is  composed  of  a  terrestrial  and  a  celestial 
object,  there  must  necessarily  be  a  certain  union  and  Koivuria  which 


428  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

we  properly  call  sacramental.  For  that  union  is  neither  essential, 
nor  natural,  nor  accidental,  but  in  view  of  the  materia  unita,  it  is 
extraordinary  ;  in  regard  to  the  design  it  is  sacramental.  Therefore 
one  does  not  exist  without  the  other;  for  instance,  water  without  the 
Spirit,  nor  the  Spirit  without  the  water,  because  these  too  are  most 
intimately  united  in  the  sacramental  act,  nor  can  one  be  a  Sacrament 
without  the  other." 

This  method  of  stating  the  doctrine  seems  to  have  been  induced 
by  the  views  held  with  regard  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  in  that  Sac- 
rament, especially,  is  it  satisfactorily  verified  and  illustrated.  Much 
diversity  of  opinion  and  statement  prevailed  as  to  what  constitutes 
the  celestial  material  in  Baptism. 

The  most  prominent  and  able  opponent  of  this  assumption  was 
found  in  the  vigorous  and  indefatigable  Dr.  Baicr,  "who  contended 
that  the  expression,  celestial  material,  should  be  entirely  ignored  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  in  general,  and  we  should  adhere  to 
the  simple  doctrine  of  the  earlier  dogmaticians,  who  do  not  men- 
tion it  at  all."  It  seems  to  have  maintained  its  hold  upon  the  great 
body  of  Lutheran  divines,  as  is  manifest  among  others  from  the 
statements  of  Guericke,  who  regards  the  correct  view  of  the  efficacy 
of  the  Sacraments  to  lie  nearer  that  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  rep- 
resentation, than  that  which  is  found  in  the  Reformed  theology.  If 
Guericke  be  right  in  this  supposition,  so  much  the  worse  for  the 
Reformed  theology.  Neither  Guericke,  strenuous  Lutheran  as  he 
is,  nor  any  other  Lutheran,  can  be  deterred  from  holding  or  defend- 
ing the  accredited  doctrines  of  the  Church,  provided  they  be  first 
ascertained  to  be  the  teachings  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  or  clear  and 
necessary  deductions  therefrom,  by  any  suspicion  or  charge  of 
thereby  approximating  Romanism.  The  tnith  is  more  valuable 
than  reputation  or  presumed  consistency. 

So  long  however,  as  it  remains  an  undenied  fact,  that  in  each  cen- 
tury of  her  existence  the  Lutheran  Church  has  demanded,  with  firm 
and  unanimous  voice,  the  absolute  necessity  of  faith  in  order  to  any 
real  sanctifying  or  saving  benefit  being  derived  from  the  use  of  the 
Sacraments,  which  cuts  up  by  the  very  roots  the  whole  theory  of 
the  Romish  ex  'opcre  opcrato,  we  may  well  endure  the  charge  of 
occupying  a  higher  position  than  others,  as  to  our  interpretation  of 
the  value  and  efficiency  of  those  ordinances  in  which  all  rejoice. 

Even  so  un-Lutheran  a  witness  as  Dr.  C.  Hodge,  of  Princeton, 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  429 

very  frankly  declares  that  "the  Lutheran  definition  of  the  Sacra- 
ments agrees  in  all  essential  points  with  that  of  the  Reformed 
Churches."  The  approximation  towards  Rome,  therefore,  quoted 
from  Guericke,  cannot  be  so  close  as  to  endanger  any  "  essential 
pointy  The  same  distinguished  theologian  very  candidly  admits, 
that  "  this  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith,  or  as  Luther  has  it,  by  faith 
alone,  has  saved  the  Lutheran  system  from  the  virus  of  ritualism." 

"The  Lutheran  Church"  says  Guericke,  "  regards  the  Sacraments 
as  actions  wherein  God,  through  external  signs  by  Him  appointed, 
offers  and  confers  His  invisible  and  heavenly  gifts;  they  see  in  the 
Sacraments  visible  signs,  which  in  virtue  of  the  divine  word  of  pro- 
mise pronounced  over  them,  in  such  sense  contain  the  invisible 
divine  gifts  they  signify  that  they  communicate  them  (Mittheilen) 
to  all  who  partake  of  them,  although  only  to  believers  to  their 
good." 

The  divergency  between  the  strict  Lutheran  view  of  the  efficacy 
of  the  Sacraments,  and  that  which  is  set  forth  in  the  Reformed  sym- 
bols, does  not  display  itself  at  first  sight.  The  formal  definitions 
are  so  near  alike  as  to  be  almost  interchangeable.  It  is. not  until  we 
come  to  the  question,  '  how,  in  the  Sacraments,  are  the  things  signi- 
fied, conveyed  and  applied  to  those  who  by  faith  worthily  receive 
them?'  that  this  difference  appears. 

If  we  cannot  account  for  this  difference  upon  the  supposition  of 
a  difference  of  philosophic  conception,  if  after  all  allowance  be  made 
for  the  difference  of  interpretation  of  the  same  language  there  still 
remains  an  unresolved  residuum,  we  cannot  but  ask,  must  there  not 
be  some  definite  efficacy  predicated  of  the  Sacraments?  With  the 
whole  conception  of  a  Sacrament  before  the  mind,  must  we  not  as- 
sociate with  it,  apart  from  all  accessories,  an  effect  possible  when 
all  the  conditions  are  met,  such  as  this  view  indicates,  so  as  to  attain 
the  end  designed,  and  vindicate  the  propriety  of  its  appointment? 
It  is  not  limiting  salvation  to  the  Sacraments,  and  irrespective  of 
possibilities  or  intentions,  to  send  all  to  perdition  who  may  not  be 
in  possession  or  enjoyment  of  them,  to  say  that  the  things  intended 
by  the  Sacraments  are  secured  by  them  and  only  by  them.  It  is 
only  to  say  that  there  was  a  place  in  Christ's  kingdom  for  them, 
and  that  they  accomplish  the  end  for  which  they  were  appointed. 
We  may  with  full  comfort  and  assurance  remit  all  supposable  ex- 
ceptions or  cases  of  difficulty   to   the  goodness  and  the  wisdom  of 


430  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

him  who  will  most  wondrously  provide  for  every  emergency  and 
harmonize  all  apparent  contradictions. 

The  difficulty  is  sometimes  felt,  and  the  objection  urged,  that  by 
ascribing  intrinsic  efficacy  to  the  Sacraments,  we  would  seem  to  in- 
vade the  province  and  ignore  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit.*  The 
conflict  supposed  is  only  apparent,  not  real.  No  theory  of  the 
Sacraments  can  stand  for  a  moment,  that  does  not  fully  harmonize 
with  the  clear  statements  of  the  Scriptures  as  to  the  office  and  work 
either  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  or  the  Spirit.  In  this  instance  we 
have  little  difficulty  in  recognizing  the  agreement. 

The  representations  of  the  Symbols,  and  of  those  authorized  to 
interpret  them,  are  uniform  in  their  testimony  on  this  point.  This 
is  placed  beyond  cavil  or  quibble  by  the  express  and  definite  lan- 
guage of  Article  V.f  of  the  Augsburg  Confession:  '' throiigli  the 
instnnnentality  of  the  zvord  and  Sacraments  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given, 
who,  when  and  where  it  pleases  God,  tvorks  faith  in  those  who  hear 
the  Gospel."  Equally  clear  and  definite  are  the  statements  of  the 
Apology  and  the  Form  of  Concord.  Chemnitz  very  emphatically 
declares:  "The  Sacraments  are  certainly  not  to  be  put  upon  an 
equality  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  as  to  be  regarded  as  conferring 
grace  in  an  equal  and,  in  fact,  an  identical  respect  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  Himself."  *  *  "  But  most  carefully  and  solicitously,  when 
we  dispute  concerning  the  virtue  and  efficacy  of  Sacraments,  must 
we  avoid  taking  from  God,  and  transferring  to  the  Sacraments,  what 
properly  belongs  to  the  grace  of  the  Father,  the  efficacy  of  the  Spirit, 
and  the  merit  of  tlie  Son  of  God  ;  for  this  would  be  the  crime  of 
idolatry ;  nor  are  the  Sacraments  to  be  added  as  assisting  and 
partial  causes  to  the  merit  of  Christ,  the  grace  of  the  Father,  and 
the  efficacy  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  for  this  would  involve  the  same 
crime."! 

"Baptism,"  says  Gerhard,  "is  the  washing  of  water  in  the  word, 
by  which  washing  the  whole  adorable  Trinity  purifieth  from  sin  him 
who  is  baptized,  not  by  the  work  wrought  {ex  opere  operatd),  but  by 
the  effectual  working  of  the  Holy  Ghost  coming  upon  him,  and  by 
his    own    faith."     After    quoting    the    above.    Dr.    Krauth    adds:§ 

*See  Hodge's  Theology,  Vol.  III.,  503  et  510. 
f  See  Evang.  Review  (1870),  Voh  XXI.,  598. 
J  Exam.  Con.  Trid. 
I  Cons.  Ref.,  p.  558. 


THE    USE    OF   THE    SACRAMENTS.  43 1 

"  Such  is  the  tenor  of  all  the  definitions  our  Church  gives  of  Bap- 
tism, from  the  simple,  elementary  statements  of  the  Catechism  up 
to  the  elaborate  definitions  of  the  great  doctrinal  systems."  Dr. 
Krauth's  exceptional  familiarity  with  all  that  has  been  written  upon 
this  subject,  and  his  well-known  pronounced  position  in  regard  to 
the  nature  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  give  additional  value  to 
this  testimony.  Speaking  of  the  unjust,  because  unfounded,  charges 
against  our  Church  on  this  subject,  he  says:  "She  regards  it  as 
just  as  absurd  to  refer  any  blessings  to  Baptism,  as  her  encjincs 
define  it,  as  it  would  be  to  attribute  to  swords  and  guns  the  power 
of  fighting  battles  without  soldiers  to  wield  them." 

Sacraments  are  one  of  the  agencies  employed  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
by  which  to  accomplish  his  divine  work.  His  presence  and  power 
in  and  through  them  are  neither  denied  nor  ignored,  but  on  the 
other  hand,  are  fully  recognized  and  acknowledged  by  the  Lutheran 
conception  of  a  Sacrament.  There  can  be  no  Sacrament  without 
the  element,  and  the  word,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  which  unites  them. 
Whenever,  therefore,  a  Sacrament  is  administeerd,  the  entire  con- 
stituency is  necessarily  present,  else  it  would  be  no  Sacrament. 

It  is,  therefore,  unjust  to  assert  that  our  theologians  ignore  the 
operations  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  their  representations  of  the  intrinsic 
efficacy  of  the  Sacraments.  There  may  or  there  may  not  be  a 
special  manifestation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  this  is  not  dependent 
upon  the  administration  of  the  Sacrament,  or  caused  by  it. 

The  Holy  Ghost  is  ever  present  in  the  preaching  of  the  word,  but 
not  always  with  the  same  demonstration.  Sometimes  there  are 
Pentecostal  results,  at  others  there  are  no  results  to  be  seen  ;  yet  it 
is  ever  the  same  word,  armed  with  its  own  peculiar  efficacy. 

What  ls  a  Sacrament? 

We  are  now  prepared  to  ask  and  to  answer  the  question,  "  What 
is  the  Church's  definition  of  a  Sacrament?"  TJie  Apology  s,z.ys  very 
concisely  :  "  The  Sacraments  are  rites  commanded  by  Christ,  and 
to  which  is  added  the  promise  of  grace."  "  A  Sacrament  is  a  cere- 
mony or  work,  in  which  God  holds  out  to  us  that  which  the  pro- 
mise annexed  to  the  rite  offers."  Chemnitz,  at  great  length  and 
with  characteristic  force  and  clearness,  lays  down  and  defends  the  fol- 
lowing particulars:  "Any  ordinance  that  is  to  be  properly  regarded 
as  a  Sacrament  of  the  New  Testament  must  have  the  following  re- 


432  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

quisites  :  I.  It  must  have  an  external,  or  corporeal  and  visible  ele- 
ment or  sign,  which  may  be  handled,  exhibited,  and  used  in  certain 
external  rites.  2.  The  element  or  sign,  and  the  rite  in  which  it  is 
employed,  must  have  an  express  divine  command  to  authorize  and 
sanction  it.  3.  It  must  be  commanded  and  instituted  in  the  New 
Testament.  4.  It  must  be  instituted  not  for  a  certain  period  or 
generation,  but  to  be  in  force  until  the  end  of  the  world.  5.  There 
must  be  a  divine  promise  of  grace  as  the  effect  or  fruit  of  the  Sacra- 
ment. 6.  That  promise  must  not  only  simply,  and  by  itself,  have 
the  testimony  of  God's  word,  but  it  must  by  the  divine  ordinance  be 
annexed  to  the  sign  of  the  Sacrament,  and,  as  it  were,  clothed  with 
that  sign  or  element.  7.  That  promise  must  not  relate  to  the 
general  gifts  of  God,  whether  corporeal  or  spiritual,  but  it  must  be 
a  promise  of  grace  or  justification,  i.  e.,  of  gratuitous  reconciliation, 
the  remission  of  sins,  and,  in  a  word,  of  all  the  benefits  of  redemp- 
tion. 8.  And  that  promise  in  the  Sacraments  is  either  signified  or 
announced,  not  in  general  only,  but  on  the  authority  of  God  is 
offered,  presented,  applied,  and  sealed  to  the  individuals  who  use 
the  Sacraments  in  faith." 

Hutter  describes  it  thus:  "A  Sacrament  is  a  sacred  rite,  divinely 
instituted,  consisting  partly  of  an  external  element  or  sign,  and 
partly  of  a  celestial  object,  by  which  God  not  only  seals  the  promise 
of  grace  peculiar  to  the  gospel  (/.  e.,  of  gratuitous  reconciliation), 
but  also  truly  presents,  through  the  external  elements,  to  the  in- 
dividuals using  the  Sacrament,  the  celestial  blessings  promised  in 
the  institution  of  each  of  them,  and  also  savingly  applies  the  same 
to  those  who  believe."  By  the  grace  of  the  gospel  is  understood 
"the  applying  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  secured  by  the  merit  of 
Christ,  and  promised  in  the  gospel,  namely,  grace  that  calls,  illumi- 
nates, regenerates,  etc." 

From  Gerhard  we  extract  the  following:  "A  Sacrament  is  a 
sacred  and  solemn  rite  divinely  instituted,  by  which  God,  through 
the  ministry  of  man,  dispenses  heavenly  gifts,  under  a  visible  and 
external  element,  through  a  certain  word,  in  order  to  offer,  apply 
and  seal  to  those  using  them  and  believing,  the  special  promise  of 
the  gospel  concerning  the  gratuitous  remission  of  sins."  Quenstedt 
says:  "The  word  Sacrament  is  understood  for  the  solemn  rite  insti- 
tuted, prescribed  and  commanded  by  God,  in  which,  by  an  external 
and  visible  sign,  invisible  benefits  are  graciously  offered,  conferred 


THE    USE    OF   THE    SACRAMENTS.  433 

and  sealed."  Baier  says:  "A  Sacrament  in  general  may  be  defined 
as  an  action,  divinely  appointed,  through  the  grace  of  God,  for 
Christ's  sake,  employing  an  external  element  cognizable  by  the 
senses,  through  which,  accompanied  by  the  words  of  the  institution, 
there  is  conferred  upon  or  sealed  unto  men  the  grace  of  the  gospel 
for  the  remission  of  sins  unto  eternal  life."  Hollazius  defines  in 
this  manner:  "A  Sacrament  is  a  sacred  and  solemn  rite  divinely 
instituted,  by  which  God,  by  the  intervening  ministry  of  man, 
through  an  external  and  visible  element  united  with  the  words  of 
the  institution,  presents  something  celestial  (or  heavenly  gifts)  to 
the  individuals  participating,  in  order  to  offer  to  all  men  and  to 
confer  upon  and  seal  unto  believers  the  grace  of  the  gospel." 

Number  of  Sacraments. 

It  is  a  matter  of  surprise  and  congratulation  that  the  Reformers 
so  quickly  and  so  unanimously  settled  the  question  of  the  number 
of  the  Sacraments.  They  were  guided  by  the  only  principle  which 
could  secure  them  from  mistake.  Dropping  for  the  time  all  that 
had  been  surmised  and  conjectured  by  the  extravagant  and  fanciful 
schoolmen,  they  went  for  unerring  instruction  directly  to  the  New 
Testament.  Accepting  only  those  which  were  admitted  by  all  to  be 
Sacraments,  they  sought  out  their  essential  elements  or  characteris- 
tics. Having  thus  decided  what  were  the  indispensable  constituents 
of  a  Sacrament,  such  as  are  found  in  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, they  proceeded  to  apply  this  test  to  all  the  other  rites  and  in- 
stitutions, which  at  one  time  or  another  had  been  called  Sacraments. 

These  must  have  sure  evidence  of  divine  appointment.  As  none 
but  God  could  promise  grace,  so  none  but  God  could  appoint  a  sign 
or  seal  of  it,  or  institute  an  ordinance  that  might  be  the  means  of 
communicating  it.  This  is  God's  province  and  prerogative  alone. 
They  must  necessarily  signify  grace,  as  Baptism,  of  cleansing,  re- 
newing, regenerating,  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  spiritual  food,  nour- 
ishment, strength,  and  at  the  same  time  be  seals  of  this  grace,  by 
which  those  who  participate  in  faith  may  be  sanctified  and  saved. 
They  must  necessarily  have  the  promise  of  grace,  /.  e.  "the  special 
promise  of  the  gospel  concerning  the  gratuitous  remission  of  sins." 
They  must  also  be  general  and  perpetual  in  character,  and  applica- 
ble to  all  classes,  conditions  and  generations  of  men,  co-extensive 
with  the  continuance  of  Christ's  everlasting  kingdom,  from  which 
they  dare  nev^er  be  divorced. 


434  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Dr.  Schmid,  of  Erlangen,  says:  "We  cannot  determine  from  the 
meaning  of  the  word  Sacrament  per  sc,  what  sacred  services  are  to 
rank  as  Sacraments;  but  the  marks  which  belong  to  the  two  ser- 
vices, by  common  consent  designated  as  Sacraments,  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper,  are  examined,  and  all  other  rites  are  excluded 
from  this  conception  of  a  Sacrament  which  do  not  present  similar 
marks.  In  doing  this,  it  is  not  affirmed  that  the  idea  of  Sacrament 
/rr  se  does  not  belong  to  them,  but  it  is  maintained  that  it  is  not 
applicable  to  them  in  the  same  sense  as  to  the  two  genuine  Sacra- 
ments." 

In  reference  to  this  matter,  Chemnitz  says:  "We  will  not  contend 
about  the  definitions  of  this  man  or  that  man,  of  the  ancients  or 
the  moderns,  but  we  shall  assume  the  ground  which  is  beyond  con- 
troversy and  acknowledged  among  all.  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist 
are  confessed  by  all  to  be  truly  and  properly  Sacraments."  Baier  is 
of  similar  opinion:  "Thus,  therefore,  from  the  commonly  received 
conceptions  of  the  marks  in  which  those  rites  agree  that  are  un- 
doubtedly Sacraments,  it  is  apparent  that  those  which  may  perchance 
be  called  Sacraments,  but  have  not  these  common  requisites,  are 
not  Sacraments  in  the  same  sense  and  reality  as  those  which  are 
properly  so  called,  but  are  only  equivocally  designated  as  such." 

Adhering  strictly  and  unfalteringly  to  this  rule,  it  very  soon  be- 
came manifest  that  the  additional  five  Sacraments,  endorsed  by  the 
Council  of  Trent,  could  not  be  accepted  as  valid  Sacraments.  They 
all  lacked  one  or  more  of  the  essential  dements  of  a  Sacrament  as 
discovered  in  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist. 

Concerning  absolution,  however,  for  awhile  there  had  been  some 
wavering.  Chemnitz  admits  that  some  of  the  theologians  would 
have  granted  it  a  place  among  the  Sacraments,  "  because  it  has  the 
application  of  a  general  promise  to  the  individuals  using  this  service. 
But  still  it  is  certain  that  absolution  has  not  an  established  external 
element,  or  sign,  or  rite,  instituted  or  commanded  of  God.  And 
although  the  imposition  of  hands,  or  some  other  external  rite,  may 
be  applied,  yet  it  is  certainly  destitute  of  a  special  and  express  divine 
command.  Nor  is  there  any  promise,  that  through  any  such  external 
rite,  God  will  efficaciously  apply  the  promise  of  the  Gospel.  We 
have,  indeed,  the  promise  that  through  the  word  he  wishes  to  be 
efficacious  in  believers ;  but  in  order  to  constitute  anything  a  Sacra- 
ment, not  only  is  a  naked  promise  in  the  word  required,  but  that  by 


THE    USE    OF   THE    SACRAMENTS.  435 

a  divine  appointment  or  institution,  it  be  expressly  clothed  with 
some  sign  or  rite  divinely  commanded.  But  the  announcement  or 
recitation  of  the  Gospel  promise  is  not  such  a  sign,  for  in  that  way 
the  general  preaching  of  the  gospel  would  be  a  Sacrament.  There- 
fore absolution  is  not  properly  and  truly  a  Sacrament  in  the  zvay  or 
sense  in  which  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  Sacraments ;  but 
if  any  one,  with  this  explanation  and  difference  added,  would  wish 
to  call  it  a  Sacrament  on  account  of  the  peculiar  application  of  the 
promise,  the  Apology  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  declares  that  it 
would  not  oppose  the  idea." 

The  impossibility  of  defending  the  sacramental  character  of  the 
added  five  of  the  Council  at  Trent  has  become  so  apparent  that  none 
but  those  acknowledging  the  supremacy  of  the  Papacy  for  a  moment 
affirm  it.  Admitting  that  they  may  be  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  existing  rites  in  the  Church,  yet  every  rite  is  not  a  Sacra- 
ment. However  expressive  and  useful  these  ceremonies  may  be, 
they  have  not  been  associated  with  the  promise,  the  sign  or  seal  of 
grace,  by  which  to  apply  to  believers  the  benefits  of  redemption. 
Their  design  is  much  more  limited,  and  their  application  is  not  uni- 
versal. Matrimony  is  indeed  a  divine  institution,  but  has  nothing  to 
do  with  applying  the  benefits  of  redemption  to  believers.  For  con- 
firmation, penance  and  extreme  unction,  as  expounded  and  practiced 
in  the  Church  of  Rome,  we  fail  to  find  any  authorization  whatever  in 
the  New  Testament.  As  now  existing,  they  were  not  instituted  by 
Christ,  but  by  man.  Concerning  ordination  as  a  Sacrament,  it  may 
be  remarked  that  it  was  never  claimed  by  the  Apostles,  nor  affirmed 
of  them  in  the  New  Testament,  that  they  conferred  other  than  mirac- 
ulous power.  They  did  not  possess,  nor  did  they  claim,  the  power 
of  conferring  the  sanctifying  and  saving  influences  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Much  less  is  it  declared  or  implied  that  apostolic  gifts  were 
designed  to  be  perpetuated  in  the  Church. 

Can  it  be  for  a  moment  supposed  that  if  Christ  intended  such  an 
array  of  ordinances  to  be  associated  with  the  bestowment  of  grace, 
nearly  tzvelve  centuries  should  be  permitted  to  pass  before  it  should 
be  discovered,  and  four  more  before  the  Church  of  Christ  should  be 
certified  of  it? 

The  relation  of  the  Sacraments  to  the  growth  of  ritualism  and  to 
the  development  of  hierarchy  is  so  intimate  that  we  can  easily 
understand  why  they  were    multiplied.       Protestantism  could  not 


436  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

have  done  what  it  has  thus  far  achieved,  nor  would  it  to-day  be  the 
power  it  has  become,  had  it  accepted  the  perversions  of  Rome  on 
this  subject.  We  owe  it  to  the  gospel  and  to  the  heroic  achieve- 
ments of  that  second  heralding  of  it,  to  guard  with  unsleeping  vigi- 
lance all  our  teachings  concerning  the  Sacraments. 

At  this  point  it  may  be  a  matter  of  interest  to  place  in  juxtaposi- 
tion the  several  authorized  formal  definitions  of  a  Sacrament. 

1.  TJie  Apology  (1530)  says:  "If  we  regard  as  Sacraments  the 
external  signs  and  ceremonies  which  God  enjoined  and  with  which 
he  connected  the  promise  of  grace,  it  is  easy  to  determine  what  are 
Sacraments;  for  ceremonies  and  other  external  things  instituted  by 
men  are  not  Sacraments  in  this  sense;  because  men  cannot  promise 
the  grace  of  God  without  authority.  Signs,  therefore,  which  are 
instituted  without  the  command  of  God,  are  not  signs  of  grace,  al- 
though they  may  be  memorials  to  children  and  to  the  ignorant,  like 
a  painted  cross." 

2.  The  first  Helvetic  Confessioii  (1536)  says:  "Sacraments  are 
not  only  tokens  of  human  fellowship,  but  also  pledges  of  the  grace 
of  God,  by  which  the  ministers  do  work  together  with  the  Lord,  to 
that  end  which  He  doth  promise,  offer  and  bring  to  pass;  yet  so, 
as  we  said  before  of  the  ministry  of  the  word,  that  all  the  saving 
power  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  Lord  alone."  "  Sacraments  are  visible 
patterns,  instituted  by  God,  of  the  grace,  good  will,  and  promises  of 
God  toward  us;  sure  testimonies,  and  holy  remembrances,  the  which 
under  earthly  signs  do  represent  unto  us,  and  set  before  our  eyes, 
heavenly  gifts,  and  do  withdraw  the  mind  from  earthly  to  heavenly 
things.  Moreover,  the}'  be  tokens  of  Christian  brotherhood  and 
fellowship.  Therefore,  a  Sacrament  is  not  only  a  sign,  but  it  is 
made  up  of  two  things,  to  wit,  of  a  visible  or  earthly  sign,  and  of  the 
thing  signified,  which  is  heavenly ;  the  which  two,  although  they 
make  but  one  Sacrament,  yet  it  is  one  thing  which  is  received  with 
the  body,  another  thing  which  the  faithful  mind,  being  taught  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  doth  receive." 

3.  Tlie  French  Confessio7i  of  Faith  ( 1 559)  says :  "  We  believe  that 
the  Sacraments  are  added  to  the  word  for  more  ample  confirmation, 
that  they  may  be  to  us  pledges  and  seals  of  the  grace  of  God,  and 
by  this  means  aid  and  comfort  our  faith,  because  of  the  infirmity 
which  is  in  us,  and  that  they  are  outward  signs  through  which  God 
operates  by  his  Spirit,  so  that  he  may  not  signify  anything  to  us  in 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  437 

vain.     Yet  we  hold  that  their  substance  and  truth  is  in  Jesus  Christ, 
and  that  of  themselves  they  are  only  smoke  and  shadow." 

4.  Ihe  Scotch  Confession  of  Faith  (1560)  says:  "We  acknowl- 
edge and  confess,  that  we  have  two  chief  Sacraments  only,  instituted 
by  the  Lord  Jesus  and  commanded  to  be  used  of  all  those  that  will 
be  reputed  members  of  his  body;  to  wit,  Baptism,  and  the  Supper 
or  Table  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  called  the  Communion  of  his  body  and 
his  blood.  These  Sacraments  *  *  not  only  do  make  a  visible 
difference  betwixt  his  people  and  those  that  were  without  his 
league,  but  also  do  exercise  the  faith  of  his  children,  and,  by  partic- 
ipation of  the  same  Sacraments,  do  seal  in  their  hearts  the  assurance 
of  his  promise  and  of  that  most  blessed  conjunction,  union  and 
society,  which  the  elect  have  with  their  head,  Christ  Jesus.  And 
thus  we  utterly  condemn  the  vanity  of  those  that  affirm  Sacraments 
to  be  nothing  else  but  naked  and  bare  signs." 

5.  The  Belgic  Confession  (1561),  Article  XXXIIL,  says:  "We 
believe  that  our  gracious  God,  on  account  of  our  weakness  and  in- 
firmities, hath  ordained  the  Sacraments  for  us,  thereby  to  seal  unto 
us  his  promises,  and  to  be  pledges  of  the  goodwill  and  grace  of 
God  towards  us,  and  also  to  nourish  and  strengthen  our  faith; 
which  he  hath  joined  to  the  word  of  the  Gospel,  the  better  to  present 
to  our  senses  both  that  which  he  signifies  to  us  by  his  word,  anci 
that  which  he  works  inwardly  in  our  hearts,  thereby  assuring  and 
confirming  in  us  the  salvation  which  he  imparts  to  us.  For  they 
are  visible  signs  and  seals  of  an  inward  and  invisible  thing,  by  means 
whereof  God  worketh  in  us  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Therefore  the  signs  are  not  in  vain  or  insignificant,  so  as  to  deceive 
us.  For  Jesus  Christ  is  the  true  object  presented  by  them,  without 
whom  they  would  be  of  no  moment." 

6.  The  Heidelberg  Catechism  (1563),  Question  66,  says:  "The 
Sacraments  are  visible,  holy  signs  and  seals,  appointed  of  God  for 
this  end,  that  by  the  use  thereof  he  may  the  more  fully  declare  and 
seal  to  us  the  promise  of  the  Gospel;  namely,  that  he  grants  us  out 
of  free  grace  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  everlasting  life,  for  the  sake 
of  the  one  sacrifice  of  Christ,  accomplished  on  the  cross." 

7.  The  Church  of  England  (1563),  in  Article  XXV.,  says:  "Sac- 
raments ordained  of  Christ  be  not  only  badges  or  tokens  of  Chris- 
tian men's  profession,  but  rather  they  be  certain  sure  witnesses,  and 
effectual  signs  of  grace  and  God's   good  will   towards   us,  by  the 

29 


438  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

which  he  doth  work  invisibly  in  us,  and  doth  not  only  quicken,  but 
also  strengthen  and  confirm  our  faith  in  him." 

8.  The  Second  Helvetic  Confession,  (1566)  Chapter  19,  says: 
"  Sacraments  be  mystical  symbols,  or  holy  rites,  or  sacred  actions, 
ordained  of  God  Himself,  consisting  of  His  word,  of  outward  signs, 
and  of  things  signified;  whereby  He  keepeth  in  continual  memory, 
and  eftsoons  (from  time  to  time)  recalleth  to  mind,  in  His  Church, 
His  great  benefits  bestowed  upon  man;  and  whereby  He  sealeth 
up  His  promises,  and  outwardly  representeth,  and,  as  it  were, 
offereth  unto  our  sight,  those  things  which  inwardly  He  performeth 
unto  us,  and  therewithal  strengtheneth  and  increaseth  our  faith 
through  the  working  of  God's  Spirit  in  our  hearts ;  lastly,  whereby 
He  doth  separate  us  from  all  other  people  and  religions,  and  con- 
secrateth  and  bindeth  us  wholly  unto  Himself,  and  giveth  us  to 
understand  what  He  requireth  of  us." 

9.  The  Irish  Articles  of  Faitli  (161 5)  say:  "The  Sacraments  or- 
dained by  Christ  be  not  only  badges  or  tokens  of  Christian  men's 
profession,  but  rather  certain  sure  witnesses  and  effectual  or  power- 
ful signs  of  grace  and  God's  good  will  toward  us,  by  which  He 
doth  work  invisibly  in  us,  and  not  only  quicken,  but  also  strengthen 
and  confirm  our  faith  in  Him." 

/  10.  Tlie  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  (1647)  says:  "Sacraments 
are  holy  signs  and  seals  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  immediately  in- 
stituted by  God,  to  represent  Christ  and  His  benefits,  and  to  confirm 
our  interest  in  Him,  as  also  to  put  a  visible  difference  between 
those  that  belong  unto  the  Church  and  the  rest  of  the  world ;  and 
solemnly  to  engage  them  to  the  service  of  God  in  Christ  according 
to  His  word." 

11.  The  Westminster  Shorter  Catechism  (1647)  says:  "A  Sacra- 
ment is  a  holy  ordinance  instituted  by  Christ;  wherein,  by  sensible 
signs,  Christ  and  the  benefits  of  the  new  covenant  are  represented, 
sealed  and  applied  to  believers." 

12.  The  Confessio7i  of  the  W^aldenses  (1655)  says:  "We  believe 
that  God  does  not  only  instruct  us  by  His  word,  but  has  also  or- 
dained certain  Sacraments  to  be  joined  with  it,  as  means  to  unite  us 
to  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  make  us  partakers  of  His  benefits;  and  that 
there  are  only  two  of  them  belonging  in  common  to  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  under  the  New  Testament,  to  wit.  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper." 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS. 


439 


13.  The  Methodist  Episcopal  Articles  of  Religion  (1784)  say: 
"Sacraments  ordained  of  Christ  are  not  only  bad<i^es  or  tokens  of 
Christian  men's  profession,  but  rather  they  are  certain  signs  of 
grace,  and  God's  good  will  toward  us,  by  the  which  He  doth  work 
invisibly  in  us,  and  doth  not  only  quicken,  but  also  strengthen  and 
confirm  our  faitli  in  Him." 

Administration  of  the  Sacraments. 

Avery  important  branch  of  our  examination  presents  itself  in  the 
question  of  the  public  administration  of  these  sacred  ordinances. 
In  what  manner  and  under  what  circumstances  are  they  to  be  cm- 
ployed  ? 

They  were  given  by  Christ  not  to  individuals,  for  special  personal 
use,  nor  yet  to  the  Apostles  as  a  particular  class,  but  to  them  as  the 
first  public  functionaries  of  the  Gospel,  as  its  heralds.  "Go  ye  there- 
fore and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghosts     Matt,  xxviii.  19. 

*'As  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  forth 
the  Lord's  death  till  He  come."      i  Cor.  xi.  26. 

It  must  needs  be  that  upon  all  questions  pertaining  to  the 
doctrines  and  the  ordinances  of  the  Church,  the  Apostles  received 
vastly  more  personal  and  official  instruction  than  stands  written  in 
the  brief  gospel  narrative.  That  which  is  essential  and  which  is 
necessary  to  legitimate  their  teachings  and  their  actions,  is  recorded. 
For  their  guidance  in  all  doubtful  cases,  and  for  their  preservation 
from  all  error,  the  promise  was  given  them  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
should  bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance,  whatsoever  Christ  had 
said  unto  them.*  Since  their  day,  as  the  result  of  their  example 
and  teaching,  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments  has  been  re- 
garded as  belonging  primarily  and  principally  to  the  Church  in  her 
organized  capacity,  and  to  her  regularly  chosen  and  appointed 
ministers.  There  seems  to  be  no  room  for  doubt  that  as  the  neces- 
sities of  the  case  require,  so  it  was  intended  to  perpetuate  an  order 
of  men  in  the  Church  who  should  preach  the  word  and  administer 
the  Sacraments.  Either  theoretically  or  practically,  this  has  been 
held  and  taught  in  every  age  and  by  every  branch  of  the  Church. 

To  constitute  a  ceremony  or  ritual  in  public  worship  a  Sacra- 

*John  xiv.  26. 


440  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ment,  it  must  not  only  be  divinely  appointed,  but  it  must  be  used 
for  a  designated  end,  and  administered  according  to  prescribed 
order.  We  have  no  more  command  over  the  purpose  or  the  manner 
of  observance  than  of  the  matter,  in  so  far  as  the  manner  may  have 
been  divinely  instituted.  Hafenreffer  very  justly  remarks  :  "  It  is 
specially  required  that  in  each  Sacrament  tJic  ivliole  action,  as  in- 
stituted and  ordained  by  Christ,  should  be  observed;  neither  is  the 
use  of  the  Sacraments  to  be  applied  to  foreign  ends  and  objects. 
Hence,  the  rule  :  '  Nothing  has  the  authority  or  nature  of  a  Sacra- 
ment beyond  the  application  and  act  instituted  by  Christ' — e.g.,  if 
the  water  of  baptism  be  employed  for  the  baptism  of  bells,  or  for 
the  cure  of  leprosy ;  or  when  the  consecrated  bread  is  not  distributed 
and  taken,  but  is  either  deposited  in  the  pyx,  or  offered  in  sacrifice, 
or  carried  about  in  processions,  this  is  not  the  use,  but  the  abuse 
and  profanation  of  the  Sacraments."  According  to  Hollazius :  "  God 
has  intrusted  the  right  of  dispensing  the  Sacraments  to  the  Church, 
which  commits  the  execution  or  exercise  of  this  right,  for  the  sake 
of  order  and  propriety,  to  the  called  and  ordained  ministers  of  the 
Gospel.  But  in  case  of  extreme  necessity,  where  the  Sacrament  is 
necessary  and  could  not  be  omitted  without  peril  of  salvation,  any 
Christian,  male  or  female,  may  validly  administer  the  Sacrament  of 
Baptism  or  initiation.'*  Have  such  cases  of  extreme  necessity  ever 
occurred,  or  can  they  even  be  imagined? 

Validity  and  Value  of  the  Sacraments. 

The  relation  of  the  character  and  intention  of  the  administrator 
to  the  validity  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  has  ever  been  regarded 
as  an  interesting  and  important  inquiry.  The  Apology  says:  "The 
Sacraments  are  efficacious,  even  if  they  be  administered  by  wicked 
ministers,  because  the  ministers  officiate  in  the  stead  of  Christ,  and 
do  not  represent  their  own  person."  Quenstedt  says:  "The  Sacra- 
ments do  not  belong  to  the  man  who  dispenses  them,  but  to  God, 
in  whose  name  they  are  dispensed,  and  therefore  the  gracious  effi- 
cacy and  operation  of  the  Sacrament  depend  on  God  (i  Cor.  iii.  5), 
and  not  on  the  character  or  quality  of  the  minister.  The  dispute 
about  the  i7itcniion  of  the  minister  is  more  intricate.  Propriety 
requires  that  he,  who  administers  the  Sacraments,  should  bring 
to  the  altar  a  good  intention  of  performing  what  God  has  com- 
manded and  instituted;  a  mind  not  wandering,  but  collected  and 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  44I 

fixed.  It  is  absolutely  necessary  that  the  intention  of  Christ  be 
observed  in  the  external  act.  I  say  in  the  external  act,  for  the  inten- 
tion of  the  minister  to  perform  the  internal  act  is  not  necessary ; 
that  is  performed  by  the  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Church 
of  Rome  teaches  that  the  intention  of  the  minister  is  necessary  to 
the  integrity,  verity  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacrament;  that  this  inten- 
tion has  respect,  not  only  to  the  external  act  of  administering  the 
Sacrament  according  to  the  form  of  institution,  but  to  the  design 
and  effect  of  the  Sacrament  itself.  Thus  the  Council  of  Trent:  "  If 
any  one  declares  that  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does, 
is  not  required  in  the  ministers  whilst  they  dispense  the  Sacraments, 
let  him  be  anathematized.'  " 

We  may  well  rejoice,  that  the  more  rational,  and  we  believe,  more 
scriptural  representations  of  the  reformers  on  this  subject,  delivers 
us  from  all  uncertainties  of  the  unknown  intention  of  the  officiator. 
For.  with  all  grace  locked  up  in  the  Sacfaments — with  their  efficacy 
and  validity  dependent  entirely  upon  the  undeclared  will  and  pur- 
pose of  the  administrator — who  can  know  whether  his  own  Baptism 
was  rightly  performed,  or  whether  he  has  ever  once  really  received 
the  saving  efficacy  of  the  Lord's  Supper? 

The  salvation  of  every  member  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  from 
Pope  Leo  XIII.  to  the  last  one  that  has  participated  in  its  ordinances, 
is  placed  upon  the  uncertain  condition  of  the  right  intention  of  its 
clergy.  Could  anything  more  imperil  one's  safety,  or  more  increase 
the  power  of  the  priesthood  ? 

Without  any  such  precarious  and  profitless  power  at  command, 
the  administrator,  according  to  Protestantism,  has  the  high  and  hon- 
orable prerogative  of  consecrating  the  elements,  /.  e.,  of  separating 
them  from  a  common  to  a  sacred  use,  which  he  accomplishes  by 
reciting  and  pronouncing  the  words  of  the  institution.  Gerhard 
describes  it  thus:  "The  consecration  is  not  (i)  a  mere  recitation  of 
the  words  of  the  institution  directed  only  to  the  hearers,  nor  (2)  is 
the  change  of  symbols  which  consecration  effects  a  mere  change  of 
names,  a  significative  analogy,  a  representation  of  an  absent  celestial 
thing;  *  *  *  but  it  is  a  sacred  and  efficacious  action,  by  which 
the  Sacramental  symbols  are  truly  sanctified,  i.  e.,  separated  from  a 
common  and  set  apart  for  a  Sacramental  use.  But  there  is  no  {a) 
magical  superstitious  action  dependent  on  the  dignity  or  quality  of 
the  person,  /.  e.,  on  the  power  and  character  of  the  minister  who 


442  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

renders  the  Sacraments  valid  by  the  force  of  his  intention ;  nor  {b) 
is  it  to  be  thought  that  there  is  a  certain  occult  subjective  power  in 
the  sound  or  number  of  words  by  which  the  consecration  is  accom- 
plished; {c)  nor  that  by  it  the  external  elements  are  essentially 
changed  and  transubstantiated  into  the  res  coelestis ;  but  the  pres- 
ence of  the  res  coelestis  and  its  union  with  the  res  terrena  depend 
altogether  upon  the  institution,  command  and  will  of  Christ  and 
upon  the  efficacy  of  the  original  institution,  continuing  in  the 
Church  even  until  the  present  day,  which  the  minister,  or  rather 
Christ  himself  by  the  voice  of  the  minister,  continually  repeats- 
The  minister,  therefore,  in  the  consecration  (i)  repeats  the  primitive 
institution  of  the  Sacrament  according  to  the  command  of  Christ ; 
(2)  he  testifies  that  he  does  this  not  of  his  own  accord,  nor  cele- 
brates a  human  ordinance,  but,  as  the  divinely  appointed  steward  of 
the  mysteries,  he  administers  the  venerable  Sacrament  in  the  name, 
authority  and  place  of  Christ;  (3)  he  invokes  the  name  of  the  true 
God,  that  it  may  please  him  to  be  efficacious  in  this  Sacrament 
according  to  his  ordinance,  institution  and  promise ;  (4)  he  sepa- 
rates the  external  elements  from  all  other  uses  to  a  sacramental  use, 
that  they  may  be  the  organs  and  means  by  which  celestial  benefits 
may  be  dispensed." 

In  order,  therefore,  that  the  administrator  may  rightfully  perform 
his  official  work  and  his  act  become  a  valid  Sacrament,  he  must  use 
the  divine  ordinance  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  instituted  and 
in  the  way  in  which  it  was  appointed.  Over  these  he  has  no  con- 
trol, nor  do  his  personal  peculiarities  exert  any  influence. 

Whether  he  subjectively  believes  in  the  divine  appointment  of 
the  Sacraments  or  not,  whether  he  understands  their  meaning  or 
not,  whether  he  has  full  intention  or  no  intention  to  secure  to  the 
recipient  the  spiritual  blessings  designed  to  be  conveyed  thereby, 
can  in  no  wise  affect  the  validity  or  the  value  of  the  ordinance,  or 
destroy  or  diminish  its  efficiency.  The  Sacraments  are  of  God,  not 
of  man.  Their  vitality  resides  in  their  divine  appointment,  and  not 
in  their  human  administration.  They  have  been  committed  to  the 
Church  for  the  spiritual  comfort  and  benefit  of  God's  true  children, 
who  cannot  be  deprived  of  their  priceless  advantages  by  the  unfit- 
ness, incompetency  or  perverseness  of  unworthy  officials. 

This  does  not,  however,  require  in  the  administration  of  the  Sac- 
raments   absolute    uniformity  of  manner.     As   HoUazius  has  well 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  443 

remarked:  "The  Church  cannot  change  anything  in  the  siibstantials 
of  the  Sacraments,  yet  she  rejoices  in  the  liberty  of  making  some 
change  in  the  cirannstaiitiahy  The  posture  of  the  recipient  e.  g.  is 
not  regulated  either  by  the  command  of  Christ  or  by  canon  of  the 
Church.  The  frequency  of  administration  is  not  indicated  by  stat- 
ute. The  method  of  the  distribution  of  the  elements  in  the  Eu- 
charist, or  of  applying  the  water  in  Baptism,  is  nowhere  prescribed. 
The  moral  character  of  the  recipient,  however,  is  all  important. 
His  personal  condition  either  of  faith  or  unbelief,  of  uprightness  or 
sin,  controls  and  modifies  the  results  of  the  participation  either  for 
grace  or  condemnation. 

Conflicting  Tendencies. 

In  regard  to  the  Sacraments,  we  find  in  every  age  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  two  conflicting  tendencies,  the  result  of  two  opposing 
theories.  By  some  the  disposition  exists  to  over-estimate,  and  by 
others  to  undervalue.  The  results  are  alike  lamentable  and  de- 
structive. They  are  based  upon  two  grand  underlying  peculiarities 
of  man's  mind.  The  one  may  be  characterized  as  material,  the 
other  as  spiritual;  the  one  is  largely  matter-of-fact,  the  other  mainly 
poetical ;  the  one  ever  looking  without  itself  for  help,  for  a  firm 
resting  place,  the  other,  self-conscious  and  self-confident,  looks 
rather  to  its  own  capacities  and  resources;  the  one  readily  admits 
authority  and  accepts  subjection,  that  it  may  be  freed  from  responsi- 
bility and  from  uncertainty,  the  other  resists  all  assumed  control 
and  prescribed  order,  that  it  may  gratify  its  innate  love  for  liberty 
and  its  earnest  longings  for  independence;  the  one  delights  in  a 
luxurious  ritual,  a  spectacular  display,  an  imposing  ceremonial,  the 
other  disowns  and  despises  mere  external  display,  and  rejoices  in  the 
power  to  lift  the  spirit  out  of  the  thraldom  and  dependence  upon 
base  matter. 

The  mission  of  the  Gospel,  as  delivered  a  second  time  by  the  Re- 
formers, is  well  adapted  to  mediate  between  these,  to  hold  and  cher- 
ish what  is  true  and  right  and  good  in  each,  and  by  dropping  the 
excesses  and  extremes  of  both,  to  secure  that  which  is  most  scrip- 
tural and  therefore  most  needed,  and  best  calculated  to  develop 
spiritual  life  and  godliness. 

It  is  matter  of  clear  demonstration,  and  may  be  easily  verified  by 
any  who  will   make  honest  examination,  that  the  Reformers,  and 


444  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

especially  those  whose  views  and  writings  gave  form  and  direction 
to  the  development  of  the  Lutheran  faith  and  cultus,  and  whose 
opinions  we  have  already  largely  quoted,  that  whilst  they  always 
accepted  with  unquestioning  faith  and  child-like  simplicity  the  clear 
word  of  God,  and  always  held  in  highest  reverence  and  esteem 
the  divinely  appointed  ordinances  as  co-ordinate  means  of  grace, 
they  never  represented  these  latter  as  the  only  and  indispensable 
channels  for  conveying  to  men  the  benefits  of  Christ's  redemption. 
They  had  studied  too  long  and  too  thoroughly  those  Scriptures, 
which  without,  indeed,  the  form  and  order  of  scholastic  or  scientific 
theology,  yet  with  the  clearness  and  authority  of  inspiration,  set 
forth  the  way  of  life  as  including  repentance,  faith,  a  pure  heart,  and 
a  right  life.  The  place  and  agency  and  indispensable  value  of  the 
Sacraments  are  recognized,  confessed  and  enjoined.  But  that  the 
gospel  scheme  is  embraced  in  a  mere  set  of  ceremonies,  which 
work  irresistibly,  by  their  own  inherent  power,  as  drugs  and  medi- 
cines upon  the  body,  they  never  taught  and  our  Church  has  never 
believed.  Yet  to  this  does  the  Romish  theory  of  the  Sacraments 
degrade  it.  To  this  does  ritualism,  of  any  name,  conduct  it.  The 
most  diligent  study  of  the  Bible,  and  fidelity  to  its  teachings,  are  as 
much  needed  to-day  as  at  any  former  day,  to  rescue  the  Church 
from  this  dangerous  tendency  and  to  prevent  a  return  to  this  spirit- 
ual enslavement.  Apostolic  teaching  and  apostolic  example  must 
be  produced,  and  set  over  against  the  speculations  of  visionary  mys- 
tics or  ambitious  churchmen.  The  genius  of  Christianity  must  be 
discovered  and  boldly  opposed  to  the  decisions  of  ecclesiastical  con- 
claves. It  must  be  declared  with  all  plainness,  that  this  so-called 
"  Sacramental  tlieory  "  cuts  the  very  sinews  of  true  piety  and  per- 
sonal godliness.  It  secures  salvation  of  its  own  unaided  power,  and, 
as  is  seen  in  the  practical  workings  of  it,  there  may  be  a  glittering 
religiousness  (that  is,  churchliness)  without  any  moral  rectitude. 
The  extent  to  which  this  principle  may  mislead  and  destroy,  can 
only  be  rightly  appreciated  when  we  read  its  doings  in  the  sad  de- 
cline of  "the  dark  ages,"  and  hear  its  true  spirit  in  the  ring  of 
money  which  fell  into  Tetzel's  treasury,  as  the  price  of  sins  deliber- 
erately  planned  and  to  be  as  deliberately  perpetrated. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  445 

Infant  Baptism. 

The  strict  application  of  the  principle  that  faith  is  necessary  to 
the  attainment  of  the  full  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  as  Luther  says, 
"without  faith  Baptism  profits  nothing,"  would  seem  to  invalidate 
the  argument  for  Infant  Baptism,  which  is  held  and  practised  in  all 
our  churches.  The  force  of  this  objection  is  of  sufficient  magni- 
tude to  demand  examination.  The  opponents  of  Infant  Baptism  use 
it  constantly,  as  it  presents  a  plausible  reason  for  their  position. 

The  question  of  infant  membership,  and  the  scriptural  authority 
to  bestow  upon  the  children  of  believers  the  rite  of  Baptism,  have 
been  fully  and  ably  discussed  in  the  Lecture  on  Article  IX.,  to 
which  we  refer.  We  do  not  propose  to  reproduce  that  argument, 
as  our  theme  neither  demands  nor  would  justify  it.  The  same 
remark  applies  with  equal  pertinence  to  the  intensely  interesting  and 
much  disputed  question  of  "  Baptismal  Regeneration,"  a  very  full 
discussion  of  which  may  be  found  in  Evang.  Rev.,  vol.  viii.,  p.  303- 
354.  We  desire  only  to  show  that  this  objection  has  no  real 
foundation,  and  that  our  theory  and  practice  are  in  perfect  harmony. 

When  Christ  instituted  the  ordinance  of  Baptism,  its  grand  design 
and  application  were  unquestionably  for  adults.  It  could  not  be 
otherwise.  The  Apostles  were  the  only  confessed  and  recognized 
members  of  His  kingdom.  All  others  were  yet  without.  The 
phraseology,  the  instructions  and  the  requirements  of  this  institu- 
tion, clearly  indicate  this  purpose.  As  in  Paradise  the  human  race 
began  with  adults,  and  every  arrangement  contemplated  adult  life, 
so  in  the  founding  of  the  Christian  Church,  its  membership  began 
with  adults,  and  all  its  arrangements  primarily  contemplated  adult 
spiritual  life.  But  as  the  first  creation  included,  and  when  necessity 
arose,  disclosed  full  provision  for  infant  life,  so  also  in  the  Christian 
Church  is  there  found  full  provision  for  the  spiritual  necessities  of 
children,  placed  there  by  the  unerring  wisdom  and  grace  of  its 
founder.  Adult  membership  carries  with  it  the  necessity  to  pro- 
vide, in  some  way  or  other,  for  the  relation  of  the  children  of  be- 
lievers. The  absence  of  all  command  or  intimation  that  the  relation 
established  and  disclosed  in  the  Old  Testament  would  be  abolished, 
or  in  anywise  vitiated  by  the  New  Testament,  compels  its  continu- 
ance. Nothing  short  of  the  authority  of  him  who  appointed  it, 
can  change  or  annul  it.  Without  further  formal  command  it 
remained  standing,  not,  we  conscientiously  and  firmly  believe  and 


446  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

our  Church  strongly  holds,  in  opposition,  but  in  positive  agree- 
ment, with  all  the  requirements  of  this  ordinance.  It  completes  the 
idea  of  an  initial  ordinance,  demanding  faith  of  all  who  in  adult  life 
ask  for  admission,  and  disclosing  its  arrangements  for  securing  the 
blessings  of  the  covenant  to  all  their  household:  "  The  promise  is 
unto  you  a)id  to  yo?ir  children.'' 

Of  necessity,  therefore,  the  primary  type  and  the  full  idea  of 
Baptism  must  be  sought  for,  as  it  can  only  fully  be  seen,  in  adult 
Baptism,  for  that  precedes  and  includes  the  right  of  infant  Baptism. 

It  is  thus  that  it  is  ordinarily  and  historically  brought  before  us 
in  the  records  of  the  New  Testament,  and  thus  that  in  all  subse- 
quent missionary  movements  it  presents  itself* 

That  everything  embraced  in  the  sacramental  idea  as  pertaining 
to  the  Baptism  of  an  adult  rriay  not  apply  to  the  Baptism  of  an 
infant,  neither  demands  nor  justifies  its  exclusion  from  what  is 
common  to  both.  The  defence  of  infant  membership  is  not  placed 
upon  this  ground.  Its  lawfulness  and  obligation  rest,  we  believe, 
upon  the  positive  representations  of  the  Bible,  and  the  unvarying 
examples  of  God's  true  followers  in  every  age  as  therein  recorded. 

The  idea  of  the  Sacrament,  therefore,  which  contemplates  infant 
as  well  as  adult  membership,  must  not  be  so  limited  in  its  interpre- 
tation and  application,  as  to  exclude  either  of  those  for  whom  it  is 
intended.  Its  requirements  being  controlled  by  the  circumstances 
of  its  subjects,  the  principle  remains  inviolate,  that,  notwithstanding 
the  Baptism  of  infants,  faith  is  the  condition  of  its  efficacy. 

Dr.  Schmid  says:  "The  objection  of  the  opponents,  viz.,  'the 
Sacraments  are  of  no  advantage  without  faith,  but  infants  have  no 
faith,'  is  considered  untenable,  for  faith  is  taken  into  the  account 
only  in  the  case  of  adults,  who  are  already  capable  of  being  influ- 
enced by  the  word." 

Defective  Estimate. 

It  may  not  be  amiss,  before  closing  this  article,  to  deplore  the 
confusion  of  ideas  so  largely  prevailing  in  many  Christian  commu- 
nities in  regard  to  the  value  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  and  the 
little  regard  bestowed  upon  their  observance. 

We  cannot  resist  the  temptation  nor  forego  the  pleasure  of  pre- 
senting the  following  beautiful    extract  from  the  Commentary  of 

*  See  The  Reformers  and  The  Theology  of  the  Reformation.  Cunningham,  244. 


THE    USE    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS.  447 

Rev.  Jean  Daille,  minister  of  the  French  Reformed  Church  at 
Charenton,  A.  D.  1639,  Col.  ii.  12:  "The  Sacraments  of  Christ  are 
not  vain  and  hollow  pictures  in  which  the  benefits  of  his  death  and 
resurrection  are  nakedly  portrayed  as  in  a  piece  of  art,  which  gives 
us  merely  an  unprofitable  view  of  what  it  represents. 

"  They  are  effectual  means,  which  he  accompanies  with  his  virtue 
and  fills  with  his  grace,  efifectively  accomplishing  those  things  in  us 
by  his  heavenly  power,  which  are  set  before  us  in  the  Sacrament 
when  we  receive  it  as  we  ought.  He  inwardly  nourishes,  by  the 
virtue  of  his  flesh  and  blood,  the  soul  of  him  who  duly  takes  his 
bread  and  his  cup.  He  washes  and  regenerates  that  man  within 
who  is  rightly  consecrated  by  Baptishi. 

"And  if  the  infirmity  of  infancy  prevents  the  effect  from  appearing 
at  the  instant  in  children  baptized,  yet  his  virtue  does  not  fail  to 
accompany  his  institution,  to  preserve  itself  in  them  and  to  bring 
forth  its  fruits  upon  them  in  their  person,  when  their  nature  is  capa- 
ble of  the  operations  of  understanding  and  will." 

With  many,  the  plausible  but  superficial  statements  that  no  good 
can  come  from  a  mere  external  ceremony,  and  that  all  true  piety  is 
seated  in  the  heart  and  not  in  outward  forms,  suffice  to  set  aside 
positive  enactments  and  commanded  duties.  Not  only  is  there 
either  entire  ignorance  or  more  culpable  neglect  of  the  place  and 
value  of  these  divinely  appointed  ordinances,  but  there  is  profane 
disregard  of  the  mind  and  will  of  Christ,  expressed  under  circum- 
stances the  most  solemn  and  impressive.  The  acknowledgment  of 
the  gospel  histories  as  of  canonical  authority  and  the  belief  in  the 
divine  appointment  of  the  Church  necessitate  the  acceptance  of 
these  ordinances  as  the  only  authenticated  means  for  maintaining 
and  perpetuating  its  existence.  Disregard  and  neglect  involve  a 
grave  responsibility  and  expose  to  unmeasured  risk  and  injury. 
Those  placed  beyond  their  reach  or  dying  without  a  knowledge  of 
them  will  not  be  judged  with  the  same  exacting  severity,  ''For  unto 
whom  much  is  given,  of  him  shall  much  be  reqinred."  Luke  xii.  48. 
God  will  deal  with  extraordinary  cases  in  an  extraordinary  manner. 

But  as  for  those  that  hear  the  word  there  can  be  no  salvation 
without  faith,  so  as  to  those  who  have  access  to  the  Sacraments 
there  will  be  no  other  means  afforded  for  obtaining  whatever  these 
are  appointed  to  convey.  There  can  be  no  question  that  ''the  neces- 
sity of  precept,''  as  it  is  called  by  the  theologians,  exists  in  the  posi- 


448  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tiv^e  words  of  their  appointment;  neither  should  there  be  any  doubt 
of  '' tlie  necessity  of  means;''  not  an  absolute  indissoluble  necessity, 
as  though  God  would  limit  his  omnipotence  to  a  single  agency  or 
the  bestowment  of  his  Holy  Spirit  to  a  single  channel,*  but  that 
having  given  an  appointed  instrumentality  and  having  neither 
promised  nor  revealed  any  other,  we  are  shut  up  thereto,  for  as 
Jesus  said :  "  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither  zvill 
they  be  persuaded  though  one  rose  from  the  dead ;  "  or  as  the  apostle 
Paul  writes:  "  B  if  ore  faith  came,  zve  ivere  kept  under  the  laiv,  shut 
lip  unto  the  faith  zvhich  should  aftcrzvards  be  revealed!' 

We  cannot  be  saved  without  faith,  yet  faith  in  itself  does  not 
save  us,  it  is  only  the  subjective  condition  under  which  alone  the 
work  of  Christ  becomes  efficacious  in  our  behalf  Eternal  life  is 
promised  to  the  believing,  but  the  believing  will  show  their  faith  by 
their  works,  by  their  use  of  the  means  of  grace  and  obedience  to 
the  words  of  Christ:  "Faith  which  zuorketh  by  love,"  Gal.  v.  6. 
Hollazius,  on  this  subject,  says:  "The  Sacraments  are  necessary  by 
the  necessity  of  the  precept  and  the  means.  They  have  no  abso- 
lute, but  an  ordinate  or  conditionate  necessity."  Quenstedt  says: 
"  Baptism  is  necessary  in  infants,  not  only  by  the  necessity  of  the 
precept,  but  by  the  necessity  of  the  means,  because  there  is  no 
other  means  by  which  they  may  be  regenerated ;  but  in  adults  it  is 
necessary,  because  in  that  case  it  requires  faith.  The  Eucharist  is 
necessary  to  all  Christian  adults,  by  the  necessity  of  the  precept." 

Correct  views  of  the  value  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  will 
ever  more  and  more  tend  to  elevate  them  in  our  esteem  ;  will  show 
in  clearer  light  the  wisdom  and  the  grace  of  their  appointment. 
Under  ordinary  circumstances,  we  can  as  little  dispense  with  them 
as  with  the  Word.  They  are  from  the  same  gracious  Lord,  and  for 
the  same  gracious  purpose.  A  scriptural  view  of  them,  and  an 
evangelical  use  of  them,  cannot  but  work  our  salvation. 

Chemnitz  says:  "The  Sacraments,  which  God  Himself  instituted 
to  be  aids  to  our  salvation,  can  in  no  way  be  considered  either  use- 
less or  superfluous,  or  be  safely  neglected  and  despised.  God  who 
is  rich  in  mercy     *     *     *     desires  to  present  His  grace  to  us  not 

*  Luther  says:  "God  has  not  bound  himself  to  the  Sacraments  so  as  not  to 
be  able  to  do  otherwise  without  the  Sacrament.  So  I  hope  that  the  good  and 
gracious  God  has  something  good  in  view  for  those  who  not  by  any  guilt  of 
their  own  are  unbaptized." 


THE    USE    OF   THE    SACRAMENTS.  449 

only  in  one  way,  that  is  by  His  mere  word,  but  he  desires  also  to 
help  our  infirmity  by  certain  aids,  namely  by  Sacraments,  instituted 
and  annexed  to  the  promise  of  the  Gospel,  i.  e.  by  certain  signs, 
rites  or  ceremonies,  obvious  to  the  senses,  that  by  them  He  might 
admonish,  instruct  or  make  us  sure  that  what  we  see  performed  in 
a  visible  manner,  externally,  is  effected  internally  in  us  by  the  power 
of  God. 

"  In  this  way  the  Sacraments  are,  in  respect  to  us,  signs  confirming 
our  faith  in  the  promise  of  the  Gospel;  in  respect  to  God,  they  are 
organs  or  instruments  through  which  God  in  the  word  presents, 
applies,  seals,  confirms,  increases,  and  preserves  the  grace  of  the 
gospel  promise  in  believers." 

Their  beneficial  effects  are  by  no  means  to  be  limited  to  those 
only  who  participate  in  them.  Their  influence  reaches  as  far  as 
their  observance  may  be  seen  or  known.  As  Hollazius  says:  "The 
secondary  designs  of  the  Sacraments  are:  [a)  That  they  may  be 
marks  of  the  Church,  by  which  it  is  distinguished  from  unbelievers 
('  and  symbols  of  confession  by  which  we  separate  ourselves  from 
other  sects.'  Quen.)  {b)  That  they  may  be  monuments  of  the 
benefits  of  Christ,  Luke  xxii.  18.  ic)  That  they  may  be  bonds  of 
love,  and  the  nerves  of  public  assemblies,  Eph.  iv.  5;  i  Cor.  x.  17. 
[d)  That  they  may  be  incitements  to  the  exercise  of  the  virtues, 
(Baptism  signifies  the  burying  of  the  old  Adam,  Rom.  vi.  4:  the 
Lord's  Supper  excites  us  to  a  grateful  remembrance  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  I  Cor.  xi.  26.)" 

In  all  the  wide  range  of  theological  inquiry,  there  is  none  more 
important  or  more  interesting  than  that  of  the  Sacraments.  In  the 
whole  course  of  pastoral  administration,  there  is  no  duty  more  im- 
pressive or  more  promising,  and  in  the  whole  history  of  Christian 
experience  there  is  nothing  more  central,  more  vital. 

Beyond  all  others,  does  it  become  the  ministry  and  membership 
of  our  own  historical  Church,  to  be  true  to  the  spirit  and  genius  of 
the  Reformers  in  regard  to  the  estimate  they  placed  upon  the  Sacra- 
ments. Therein  emphatically  should  we  grasp  their  spirit  and 
imitate  their  example.  More  than  in  any  other  particular  do  we 
therein  find  the  individuality  of  our  Confession.  Thereby  especially 
may  we  hope  to»  understand  our  capabilities  as  a  Church,  and  by 
rising  to  proper  self-consciousness,  and  then  to  a  proper  self-appre- 
ciation, we  may  attempt  to  influence  others,  by  wielding  the  power 


450  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  a  compact  organization,  armed  with  the  omnipotence  of  divine 
truth,  in  behalf  of  the  unifying  of  the  Church  and  the  conversion  of 
the  world. 

Shall  it  not  be  that  in  this  we  may  at  last  recognize  our  true 
mission  among  the  discordant  influences  and  dangerous  tendencies 
by  which  we  are  surrounded?  Holding  fast  with  Luther's  persist- 
ency to  Luther's  Protestantism,  as  crystallized  in  his  guiding  and 
controlling  principle  of  ''Justification  by  faith','  we  shall  be  able  to 
retain  whatever  is  vital  in  our  Church-life,  notwithstanding  the 
violent  changes  of  outward  form  and  of  internal  organization  to 
which  we  may  be  exposed. 

The  truest  and  worthiest  manifestation  of  gratitude  to  God,  and 
loyalty  to  the  Church,  is  to  bestow  a  believing  appreciation  upon 
these  priceless  means  of  grace,  and  ever  to  make  a  reverent  use  of 
them.  Then  shall  we  '^ grow  in  grace  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  To  Jiivi  be  glory,  both  now  and  for- 
ever, Amen."    2  Peter  iii.  18. 


ARTICLE  XIV. 


THE   CALL  TO  THE 
MINISTRY. 

By  l.  a.  gotwald,  d.  d. 


IN  looking  at  the  catalogue  of  distinguished  persons  who,  in  this 
course  of  Lectures,  have  addressed  you  upon  the  successive 
Articles  of  our  precious  Confessio  Aiigustana,  I  feel  an  unaffected 
diffidence  in  now  appearing  before  you.  The  importance  also  of 
the  subject,  and  the  limited  time  for  its  consideration  which,  amid 
the  unceasing  duties  of  a  large  pastoral  work,  I  have  been  able  to 
command,  intensify  that  diffidence. 

Through  the  partiality,  however,  of  my  brethren  who  constitute 
the  Board  of  Directors  of  this  Seminary,  I  have  been  chosen  to  dis- 
charge this  duty,  and  hence,  bowing  to  their  judgment  in  the  mat- 
ter, and  waiving  my  own,  T  assume  the  labor  and  proceed  to  address 
you  upon  TJie  Fourteenth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

The  Text  of  the  Article. 
Article  XIV.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  reads  as  follows: 

"  De  ordine  ecclesiastico  docent,  quod  nemo  debeat  in  ecclesia  publice  do- 
cere  aut  sacramenta  adminstrare,  nisi  rite  vocatus. — Midler,  Symbolischen 
Biicher,  p.  42. 

"  Vom  Kirchen  Regiment  wird  gelehrt,  das  niemand  in  der  Kirchen  offent- 
lich  lehren  oder  predigen,  oder  Sacrament  reichen  soil,  ohne  ordendichen 
Beruf." — Mailer,  p.  42. 

"  Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Orders  [Church  Government],  they  teach  that  no 
man  should  publicly  in  the  Church  teach,  or  administer  the  Sacraments,  ex- 
cept he  be  rightly  called  [without  a  regular  call]." — Scluxff's  Creeds  of  Chris- 
tendom, Vol.  3,  p.  15. 

Both  the  Latin  and  the  German  texts  of  the  "  editio  princeps," 

451 


452  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

1531,  underwent  subsequently,  by  different  hands,  certain  slight 
changes  and  emendations.  The  Codex  Nuremburgensis,  e.  g.,  has 
"vocatis''  for  "vocafus.''  The  "  Editio  Variata''  (1540  et  42)  adds 
also  the  words :  "  Sicut  et  Paulus  praecipit  Tito,  ut  in  civitatibus 
Presbyteros  constituat,"  (Tit  i.  5  sq.) ;  an  addition  which  was  not, 
it  is  true,  absolutely  necessary,  but  which  still,  as  an  exposition  of 
the  final  clause  of  the  Article,  serves  a  most  useful  purpose.  For, 
as  Bilmar  {Die  Aitgsbiirgische  Confession  Erkldrt  von  A.  F.  C.  Bil- 
mar,  zvciland  Professor  der  Theologie  Z2C  Marburg,  p.  1 29)  properly 
remarks  concerning  it:  "  Ein  Satz,  der  zwar  an  sich  nicht  notig, 
aber  zur  erlautering  des  rite  vocatus  doch  sehr  dienlich  ist." 

In  the  German  text  Spalatin  inserts,  after  the  word  " gelehrt,''  the 
additional  words  '' tind  gepredigt^  making  the  first  clause  read: 
"  Vom  Kirchen-regiment  wird  gelehrt  und  gepredigt."  In  the  An- 
spacher  deutsche  Handschriften,  No.  2,  the  final  phrase  "  ohne  or- 
dentliehen  Berif,  "  is  transposed  and  inserted  already  after  the  word 
"' niemand"  so  as  to  read  "Vom  Kirchen-regiment  wird  gelehrt  das 
niemand  ohne  ordentlichen  Beruf  in  der  Kirchen  offentlich  lehren 
oder  predigen,  oder  Sacrament  reichen  soil."  Spalatin  also  substi- 
tutes the  words  ''oder  micli  die''  for  the  single  word  ''oder''  just  be- 
fore "predigen!'  And  he  also  substitutes  the  words  "  er  sey  denn 
ztfor  dartsti  ordentlicli  bernffen,  for  the  words  "  oline  ordentlichen 
Berif." — Vide  Zockler  iiber  Die  Angsburg  isehe  Confession,  pp. 
244,  245. 

These  changes  are  all  merely  verbal,  and  do  not,  even  in  the 
slightest  degree,  affect  the  doctrinal  sense  of  the  Article. 

The  Historical  Occasion  of  the  Article. 

This  Article  of  the  Confession  occupies  upon  the  subject  of  the 
ministry,  concerning  which  it  treats,  a  middle  or  conservative  posi- 
tion. It  stands  midway  between  two  extreme  and  equally  false 
positions.  Like  a  sharp  double-edged,  sword  it  cuts  relentlessly 
into  the  errors  of  both. 

The  one  extreme  against  which  it  thus  stands  opposed,  and  which 
it  designedly  and  clearly  condemns,  is  the  Anabaptist  or  fanatical 
extreme,  so  prevalent  in  the  days  of  the  Reformation,  which  denied 
the  very  existence  of  the  ministerial  office,  and  which  taught  that 
all  whom  impulse  might  at  any  time,  or  in  any  way  or  place,  move 
to  it,  were  equally  entitled  to  speak  and  be  heard  in  the  Church  as 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  453 

religious  teachers.  Believing  in  what  they  called  "the  inward  word 
or  light,"  or  "an  immediate  revelation,"  they  held  that  the  objective 
or  written  word  was  insufficient  and  ineffectual  to  enlighten,  con- 
vert and  sanctify  man  [Schott  on  Augs.  Con.,  p.  87);  proceeding 
even  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  the  Spirit  of  God  could  not  work  by 
means  of  anything  outer  or  external,  and  did  not,  in  the  least,  bind 
himself  thus  to  work  through  the  objective  or  external  {Vide  Putt's 
Einleitung  in  die  Augustana,  vol.  2,  p.  172).  Thus  denying  the 
necessity  of  the  written  zvord,  as  a  means  of  grace,  they  logically,  of 
course,  also  denied  the  necessity  of  a  special  ministry  to  preach  that 
word.  And  hence,  as  we  find,  they  loudly  disowned  the  existence 
of  such  a  thing  as  the  ministerial  office.  They  assailed  the  edu- 
cation of  men  for  the  ministry,  holding  that  such  education  was 
unnecessary,  since  every  true  Christian  was  urged  on  by  the  Spirit 
of  God,  and  was  possessed  of  a  superior  inner  wisdom.  All  Chris- 
tians, they  asserted,  were,  by  the  direct  revelation  of  God's  will 
within  them,  brought  into  possession  of  the  truth,  and  were  both 
competent  and  authorized,  at  will,  to  proclaim  that  truth  to  others. 

Against  this  fanatical  spirit,  thus  ignoring  both  the  written  word 
and  the  ministry  as  a  special  office  to  preach  that  word,  Luther, 
from  the  beginning,  set  himself  with  unflinching  and  desperate 
earnestness,  both  by  voice  and  pen  assailing  and  denouncing  it.  In 
the  year  1525,  he  issued  his  famous  tract,  entitled  "  Die  Himmlischen 
Propheten^'  in  which  he  utters  against  it  his  fiercest  invectives.  Nor 
did  he  rest  until,  at  last,  it  was  suppressed  and  its  power  for  evil 
broken.  Speaking  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  divinely  ordained  instru- 
mentality by  which  man  is  brought  to  a  knowledge  of  sin,  and 
afterward  also  of  the  saving  grace  of  God  through  Christ,  he  says: 
"  Im  selben  Wort  kompt  der  Geist  und  giebt  den  Glauben,  wo  und 
welchem  er  will.  Wer  dir  eine  andre  Ordnung  furschlagt,  da 
zweifel  nicht  es  sei  der  Teufel "   [De  IVette,  2,  579). 

And  against  this  same  extreme  and  fanatical  spirit,  is  this  Four- 
teenth Article  of  the  Confession  directed.  Instead  of  ignoring  the 
word  and  sacraments,  it  recognizes  them  as  the  sole  and  only  chan- 
nels or  means  of  grace  to  man ;  and  instead  of  denying  the  minis- 
terial office,  it  boldly  asserts  and  assumes  it,  and  teaches  who,  and 
who  only,  shall  fill  it. 

The  Article,  it  may  be  noted,  is  negative  in  its    statement.     It 
says  who  shall  not  perform  ministerial  acts,  /.  e.  who  shall  not  preach 
30 


454  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  word,  and  who  shall  not  administer  the  sacraments.  But  this 
statement  of  the  doctrine  negatively  is  really  the  expression  of  it 
in  the  strongest  possible  positive  form.  It  is  the  emphatic  declara- 
tion of  the  fact  that  there  is  an  "  Ordo,''  a  special  and  sacred  min- 
isterial office,  and  that  into  this  office  no  one  shall  dare  to  enter 
unless  he  be  "rightly  called"  into  it.  The  functions  of  the  office, 
it  declares,  shall  be  discharged  by  those  only  who  are  in  ihe  office. 

But  this  Article  of  the  Confession  is  directed  also,  on  the  other 
hand,  against  another  and  opposite  extreme  concerning  the  ministry. 
Whilst  so  earnestly  maintaining  that  there  is  an  office  of  the  minis- 
try, it  yet  also,  at  the  same  time  and  with  equal  firmness,  maintains 
that  it  is  only  an  office.  This  Article,  therefore,  stands  in  open 
array  against  the  teachings  concerning  the  ministry  of  the  Church 
of  Rome,  as  well  as  against  the  fanatical  Anabaptist  spirit  prevalent 
in  the  days  of  the  Reformers.  For  Rome,  as  is  well  known,  makes 
the  ministry  a  priesthood,  and  the  ministerial  office  she  arrogantly 
exalts  into  a  separate  and  superior  ministerial  order.  (Vide  "  Sy7n- 
boHsni"  by  J.  A.  Moehler,  D.  D.,  pp.  311-316.  Also  "  Canones  et 
Decreta  Dogniatica  Concilii  Tridcntini,  De  Sacramento  Ordinisy) 
Most  inconsistently  she  makes  little  or  nothing  of  the  written  zuord, 
as  a  means  of  grace,  but,  at  the  same  time,  makes  much,  and  almost 
everything,  indeed,  of  the  visible  or  objective  sacraments,  which, 
rightly  understood,  are  the  visible  and  objective  word.  (Vide  Book 
of  Concord,  Apology,  p.  265.)  She  teaches  [Plitt's  Einlcitung  in  die 
Atigiistana,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  366,  367,)  that  justifying  grace  is  imparted 
to  man  through  the  channel  or  medium  of  the  Sacraments.  The 
primal  source  of  this  grace,  she  acknowledges,  is  Jesus  Christ,  who 
seated  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  is  essentially  the  only 
Mediator.  But  this  grace  he  does  not  impart  directly  and  without 
means.  On  the  contrary  he  has  ordained  an  "  Order  "  to  whom  he 
has  granted  authority  in  his  stead,  to  administer  the  sacraments, 
and  who  serve  as  mediators  between  him,  the  Head  of  the  Church, 
and  Christians,  as  members  of  the  same.  The  bestowal  of  this 
authority  thus  to  mediate  grace  from  Christ  to  his  people,  in  and 
through  the  sacraments,  occurs  only  in  what  is  itself  a  sacrament, 
viz.  the  sacrament  of  holy  orders,  or  consecration  to  the  priesthood, 
which  can  only  be  administered  by  a  bishop.  In  or  through  this 
sacrament  of  consecration  or  priestly  ordination,  the  person  or- 
dained receives,  once  for  all,  divine  commission   and  authority  to 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINLSTRV.  455 

administer  the  sacraments,  and  througli  tiiem  to  impart  saving 
grace  to  those  receiving  them.  And  in  order  that  they  may  always 
and  rightly  administer  the  sacraments,  there  is  further  in  ordination 
imparted  to  them  an  indestructible  priestly  character,  {character  in- 
dclibilis)  and  there  is  then  impressed  upon  them  a  distinctive  and 
indelible  official  token  or  relation.  Just  as  Baptism  distinguishes 
the  baptized  from  those  who  are  not  baptized,  so  this  character,  im- 
parted in  ordination,  divides  the  priesthood  from  the  laity  perma- 
nently and  forever.  The  priesthood,  by  ordination,  become  a  " class'' 
or  separate  ''order!'  They  are  lifted  up  by  it  above  the  great  mass 
of  other  Christians,  and  placed  in  a  range,  not  of  official  power 
merely,  but  of  personal  sanctity  and  superiority,  far  above  them. 
To  them  only,  as  a  special  and  distinct  order,  Christ  gives  the  dis- 
pensing of  sacramental  grace,  so  that  upon  their  mediating  priestly 
services  all  Christians,  if  they  wish  to  be  saved,  are  entirely 
dependent,  and  to  their  authority  they  must  be  implicitly  subject. 
Especially  is  all  this  the  case  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  priest  in 
ordination,  as  the  highest  and  most  sacred  prerogative  conferred  by 
that  .sacrament,  receives  divine  power,  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass, 
to  change  the  bread  and  the  wine  into  the  literal  or  real  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  and  then  to  present  them  to  God,  as  an  acceptable 
offering  for  Christians,  and  as  the  iiighest  possible  act  of  worship. 
This  power  thus  to  offer  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  the  priest  could 
not  possess  nor  execute,  had  he  not  in  ordination  received  also  an 
especial  call  {iwcatio)  to  execute  it. 

The  Council  of  Trent  distinctly  declares:  "If  any  one  saith  that 
there  is  not  in  the  New  Testament  a  visible  and  external  priesthood; 
or  that  there  is  not  any  power  of  consecrating  and  offering  the  true 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  of  forgiving  and  retaining  sins;  but 
only  an  office  and  bare  ministry  of  preaching  the  Gospel;  or  that 
those  who  do  not  preach  are  not  priests  at  all :  let  him  be  anathema." 
And  again:  "  If  any  one  saith  that  order  or  sacred  ordination  is  not 
truly  and  properly  a  sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  the  Lord ;  or 
that  it  is  a  kind  of  human  figment  devised  by  men  unskilled  in 
ecclesiastical  matters;  or  that  it  is  only  a  kind  of  rite  for  choosing 
ministers  of  the  word  of  God  and  of  the  sacraments:  let  him  be 
anathema."  {Schaff's  "  Creeds  of  Christendom!'  Vol.  II.,  p.  191. 
See,  also,  ''History  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  from  the  French  of 
L.  F.  Biingcnerl'  pp.  369-372.) 


456  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Such  is  the  theory  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  both  concerning  the 
ministry  itself  and  the  call  to  it.  The  ministry  is  an  order,  and  he 
only  is  in  this  order  who  has,  by  Episcopal  ordination,  been  placed 
in  it. 

Of  this  theory  our  Article  XIV.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  is 
an  emphatic  refutation.  It  gives,  upon  its  very  face,  a  marked 
prominence  to  the  public  preaching  or  teaching  of  God's  word,  as 
the  first  and  principal  part  of  ministerial  work,  and  it  thus  strikes  a 
direct  blow  at  the  conception  of  the  ministry  as  a  priesthood,  called 
or  ordained  simply  or  chiefly  to  offer  sacrifices  and  to  mediate  be- 
tween God  and  man.  And  whilst  agreeing  with  the  Church  of 
Rome  that  no  one  should  publicly  in  the  church  preach  the  word 
or  administer  the  sacraments  unless  he  be  rightly  called,  there  is 
yet  here,  by  no  means,  an  admission,  as  claimed  by  the  Romish 
Church,  that  those  only  are  thus  rightly  called  whom  a  Romish 
Bishop,  as  one  of  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  and  jure  divino, 
has  ordained.  On  the  contrary,  the  Article,  with  noble  silence, 
assumes  the  negative  of  all  such  arrogant  claims,  and  does  not 
stoop  even  to  enter  a  formal  denial.  Article  V.  and  XXVIII.,  how- 
ever, in  spirit  at  least  if  not  in  words,  do  deny  it.  The  spirit  also  of 
the  entire  Confession,  as  also  of  the  whole  work  of  the  Reformation, 
refutes  it.  For  the  Reformation,  in  its  last  analysis,  was  simply  a 
sublime  protest  against  this  false  and  crushing  sacerdotalism  of 
Rome.  The  writings  of  the  Reformers,  also,  and  the  Confessions 
throughout  (^4/^/(9^j',  VII.,  Eng.  tr.,  p.  265)  abound  in  refutations  of 
this  theory  that  ordination  by  the  hands  of  a  Romish  bishop,  or  by 
any  episcopal  hands,  as  an  exclusive,  divinely-conferred  prerogative, 
alone  constitutes  a  valid  and  true  introduction  of  a  man  to  the  office 
and  work  of  the  ministry.  Luther  says :  "  Sacerdos  in  novo  testa- 
ment© non  fit,  sed  nascitur,  non  ordinatur,  sed  creatur."  {0pp. 
Jena,  2,  p.  580).  And  Melanchthon  in  the  Apology  (Art.  XIV.,  De 
Ordine  Ecclesiasticd)  expressly  declares,  in  his  exposition  of  this 
Article,  that  the  Reformers,  for  the  sake  of  peace,  were  most  willing 
to  assist  in  maintaining  the  old  ecclesiastical  regulations  and  epis- 
copal government,  that  is,  were  willing  to  concede  to  receive  ordi- 
nation from  the  hands  of  Romish  bishops,  provided  they  were  to  be 
recognized  as  bishops  only  in  the  New  Testament  sense  oi  pastor, 
in  which  every  minister  of  the  gospel  is  a  bishop,  and  provided  it 
was  mutually  understood  that  their  exercise  of  such  episcopal  func- 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MIMSTRY.  457 

tions  in  ordination  was  not  de  jure  divino,  but  only  de  jure  Immano. 
The  Apology  reads  as  follows:  "  The  Fourteenth  Article,  in  which 
we  say  that  no  one  should  be  permitted  to  preach,  or  to  administer 
the  sacraments  in  the  Church,  except  those  only  who  are  duly 
called,  they  accept,  provided  that  we  mean  by  this  the  call  of  priests, 
who  are  ordained  or  consecrated  according  to  the  canons.  On  this 
subject  we  have  several  times  declared  in  this  convention,  that  we 
are  most  willing  to  assist  in  maintaining  the  old  ecclesiastical  regu- 
lations and  episcopal  government,  which  \s  CTiWcd  canonica  politia, 
provided  the  bishops  would  tolerate  our  doctrine,  and  receive  our 
priests.  But  the  bishops  have  hitherto  persecuted  and  murdered 
our  ministers,  contrary  to  their  own  laws.  Nor  have  we  as  yet  been 
able  to  induce  them  to  desist  from  this  tyranny.  Our  opponents 
are,  therefore,  to  blame  that  the  bishops  are  not  obeyed,  and  we  are 
excused  before  God  and  all  pious  men.  For  since  the  bishops  will 
not  tolerate  our  divines,  unless  they  reject  the  doctrine  which  we 
profess,  and  which  we  are  bound  before  God  to  confess  and  main- 
tain, we  cannot  recognize  the  bishops,  and  prefer  to  obey  God, 
knowing  that  the  Christian  Church  is  wherever  the  word  of  God  is 
correctly  taught.  Let  the  bishops  see  to  it  how  they  can  answer 
for  the  distraction  and  devastation  of  the  churches  by  such  tyranny." 
{Book  of  Concord,  Eng.  trans.,  p.  267).  The  language,  also,  of  the 
Smalcald  Articles  is  very  clear  upon  this  point.  Article  X.  [De 
Initiatione,  Ordbic  et  Vocatiojie)  says:  "  If  the  bishops  would  dis- 
charge their  office  faithfully,  and  take  due  care  of  the  Church  and 
the  Gospel,  they  might,  for  the  sake  of  charity  and  tranquility,  not 
however  from  necessity,  be  allowed  the  privilege  of  ordaining  and 
confirming  us  and  our  preachers;  yet  with  this  condition,  that  all 
unchristian  masking,  mummery  and  jugglery  should  be  removed. 
But  since  they  neither  arc,  nor  wish  to  be,  true  bishops,  but  political 
lords  and  princes,  who  will  neither  preach,  nor  teach,  nor  baptize, 
nor  administer  the  sacrament,  nor  transact  any  work  or  office  in  the 
Church,  but  force,  persecute  and  condemn  those  who  are  called  to 
this  office,  the  Church  must  not,  on  their  account,  remain  destitute 
of  ministers." 

This  Article  of  our  Confession,  therefore,  is,  as  we  before  re- 
marked, in  its  very  essence,  a  firm  protest  not  only  against  the  un- 
churchly  and  destructive  extreme  which  entirely  ignores  and  dis- 
owns the  ministerial  office,  but  also  against  the  opposite  extreme  of 


458  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  Church  of  Rome  which  elevates  the  office  into  a  holy  order  or 
sacrament.  The  Article  owes  its  very  existence,  indeed,  in  the  Con- 
fession, to  these  two  equally  wrong  and  ruinous  conceptions  of  the 
ministry  which  then  prevailed  and  which  still  prevail.  Mcehler 
("  Symbolism','  p.  315)  speaking  of  this  Fourteenth  Article,  says  it  is 
"an  Article  which  in  the  Lutheran  system  is  utterly  unintelligible, 
and  to  which,  therefore,  we  can  assign  no  place  therein."  "  It  is, 
too,"  he  adds,  "  a  consequence  of  the  accidental  character  of  this 
Article  that  it  merely  asserts  that  every  teacher  is  to  be  called  in  a 
lawful  manner,  without  at  all  determining  in  what  this  lawfulness 
consists."  But  the  Article  is  not  unintelligible.  It  is  not  acci- 
dental. It  had,  in  the  minds  of  the  framers  of  the  Confession,  a 
specific  and  clearly  defined  purpose ;  and  it  occupies,  in  the  Confes- 
sion itself,  a  designed  and  important  place.  It  was  seen  to  be  needed, 
and  hence  also  was  inserted.  Article  V.  speaks  of  the  office  itself; 
and  this  Article  teaches  by  whom,  and  whom  only,  the  functions  of 
the  office  are  to  be  exercised.  That  has  reference  to  the  object  and 
nature  of  the  ministry  ;  tills  to  the  call  to  the  ministry.  Tliat  to  the 
work  ;  this  to  the  workmen.  And  hence,  also,  the  Article  properly 
stands  iii  the  Confession  just  where  it  stands.  For,  the  logical  order 
of  thought  demands,  not  that  it  should  come,  as  some  might  have 
supposed,  immediately  following  Article  V.,  but  exactly  where  it 
does  come — viz.,  after  Article  XIII.,  on  *'  TJie  Use  of  the  Sacra- 
fnents,"  and  just  before  Article  XV.,  "  Of  Church  Rites  and  Ordin- 
ajicesy 

The  Substantial  Harmony  of  this  Article  with  the  Teach- 
ings OF  other  Protestant  Confessions  upon  the  Subject  of 
the  Ministry. 

But,  whilst  this  Article  of  our  Confession  is  thus  utterly,  in  its 
spirit  and  scope,  opposed  to  the  Romish  conception  of  the  minis- 
try, as  also  to  the  directly  opposite  or  Anabaptist  conception  of  it, 
it  is  yet  pleasant  to  note  that  it  is,  upon  this  whole  subject,  in  entire 
harmony  with  all  the  great  historic  Protestant  Confessions  which, 
since  the  days  of  the  Reformation,  have  moulded  the  thought  and 
the  faith  of  Protestant  Christendom.  All  Protestant  Creeds  recog- 
nize the  ministry  as  an  office,  and  either  assert  or  imply  that  no  one 
should  discharge  the  special  and  sacred  functions  of  the  office  un- 
less he  be  first  rightly  inducted  into  the  office.     Or,  as  Dr.  Hodge, 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  459 

(^^  Systematic  Theology,"  Vol.  III.,  p.  514,)  speaking  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  who  should  administer  the  sacraments,  says:  "Lutherans 
and  Reformed  agree  in  teaching,  first,  that  the  efficacy  of  the  sacra- 
ments does  not  depend  on  anything  in  him  who  administers  them ; 
and,  secondly,  that  as  the  ministry  of  the  word  and  sacraments  are 
united  in  the  Scriptures,  it  is  a  matter  of  order  and  propriety  that 
the  sacraments  should  be  administered  by  those  only  who  have 
been  duly  called  and  appointed  to  that  service." 

In  entire  accord,  therefore,  with  the  teachings  of  this  Fourteenth 
Article  of  our  Confession,  which  we  are  now  considering,  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Westminster  Confession  {^Confession  of  Faith,  Chap. 
XXVII.,  4)  is: 

"There  be  only  two  sacraments  ordained  by  Christ,  our  Lord,  in 
the  Gospel.  That  is  to  say,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper; 
neither  of  which  may  be  dispensed  by  any  but  by  a  minister  of  the 
word,  lawfully  ordained." 

The  Thirty-Nine  Articles,  also,  of  the  Church  of  England,  upon 
this  matter  of  the  necessity  of  a  call  to  the  ministry,  as,  indeed,  upon 
almost  every  other  point,  simply  echo  the  teachings  of  our  Augs- 
burg Confession.     Article  XXII.  declares: 

"It  is  not  lawful  for  any  man  to  take  upon  him  the  office  of  pub- 
lic preaching,  or  ministering  the  sacraments  in  the  congregation,  be- 
fore he  be  lawfully  called,  and  sent  to  execute  the  same.  And 
those  we  ought  to  judge  lawfully  called  and  sent  which  be  chosen 
and  called  to  this  work  by  men  who  have  public  authority  given 
unto  them  in  the  congregation,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into  the 
Lord's  vineyard." 

The  First  Helvetic  Confession,  also,  composed  by  a  number  of 
Swiss  divines,  delegated  and  assembled  for  the  purpose  in  the  city 
of  Basle,  in  the  year  1536,  and  which  was  the  first  Confession  which 
represented  the  faith  of  all  the  Reformed  cantons  of  Switzerland, 
says: 

"  This  office  and  this  service  of  the  ministry  shall  be  entrusted  to 
no  one  unless  he  has  been  first  well  instructed  concerning  the  know- 
ledge and  will  of  God,  blameless  in  piety  and  uprightness  of  life, 
and  been  found  and  recognized  by  the  ministers  and  proper  author- 
ities of  the  Church  to  be  earnest  and  zealous  to  advance  the  glory 
of  the  name  of  Christ." — Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  III.,  p.  22 L 

The  language  also  of  the  Second  Helvetic  Confession,  drawn  up 


460  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

by  Henry  Bullinger,  of  Zurich,  Zvvingli's  successor,  first  published 
in  Latin  in  1566,  and  which  Hagenbach  calls''^/;/  wahre.";  dogina- 
tisches  Meisters/i'ick,"  is  equally  emphatic  upon  this  point  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  call  to  the  ministry.  It  says  (Chap.  XVIII.,  Sec.  8,  D- 
Ministris  Ecclesice) : 

"  No  one  ought  to  assume  to  himself  the  honor  of  the  gospel 
ministry,  i.  e.,  no  one  should  receive  it  for  himself  as  a  mere  gift  of 
patronage,  or  by  any  trick  or  art,  or  by  his  own  mere  will.  Minis- 
ters of  the  Church  may  be  called  and  chosen  in  a  lawful  ecclesias- 
tical election;  i.  e.,  they  may  be  solemnly  elected  by  the  Church,  or 
by  those  deputed  by  the  Church  for  this  purpose,  in  a  proper  and 
regular  manner,  without  disorder,  discord  or  contention.  And  those 
who  are  elected  shall  be  ordained  by  the  presbyters  {scnioribns),  with 
a  public  charge  or  address  and  with  the  laying  on  of  hands.  Hence, 
we  here  condemn  all  those  who  run  of  their  own  accord,  when  they 
have  neither  been  elected,  sent,  nor  ordained.  (Jer.  xxiii.  32.)  We 
condemn  a  ministry  which  is  unqualified,  and  not  instructed  nor 
possessed  of  the  gifts  necessary  for  the  pastoral  office." — Creeds  of 
Christendom,  Vol.  III.,  p.  280. 

In  the  French  Confession  of  Faith,  also,  prepared  principally  by 
Calvin,  revised  and  approved  by  a  Synod  of  Paris  in  1559,  and 
adopted  by  the  Synod  of  La  Rochelle  in  15  17,  there  is  this  lan- 
guage upon  the  point  before  us : 

"We  believe  that  no  person  should  undertake  to  govern  the 
Church  upon  his  own  authority,  but  that  this  should  be  derived 
from  elections,  as  far  as  it  is  possible  and  as  God  will  permit.  And 
we  make  this  exception  especially  because  sometimes,  and  even  in 
our  own  days,  when  the  state  of  the  Church  has  been  interrupted, 
it  has  been  necessary  for  God  to  raise  men  in  an  extraordinary  man- 
ner to  restore  the  Church,  which  was  in  ruin  and  desolation.  But, 
notwithstanding,  we  believe  that  this  rule  must  always  be  binding; 
that  all  pastors,  overseers  and  deacons  should  have  evidence  of 
being  called  to  their  office." — Schaff's  Creeds  of  Christeiidom,  Vol. 
III.,  p.  377. 

And  the  same  is  taught,  also,  in  all  the  other  principal  Confes- 
sions dating  back  to  the  Reformation  period;  c.  g.,  in  the  First 
Scotch  Confession  (1560),  in  the  Belgic  Confession  (1561),  in  the 
Irish  Articles  of  Religion  (161 5),  and  in  the  Savoy  Declaration 
(1658),  as  also  in  other  Confessions  of  minor  historical  importance. 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  46 1 

Hence,  no  matter  how  widely  our  different  Protestant  Confessions 
differ  upon  other  points,  and  no  matter  how  much  each  one  of  our 
various  Protestant  branches  may,  in  this  day  of  laxity  both  in  doc- 
trine and  practice,  disregard  and  \aolate  its  own  Confession,  it 
nevertheless  is  a  fact  that  in  this  one  point  of  the  necessity  of  a  reg- 
ular call  before  assuming  to  exercise  the  office  of  the  gospel  minis- 
try, they  do  all  theoretically  and  with  hearty  unanimity  agree,  and 
do  all  with  one  accord  hold  and  teach,  in  the  words  of  this  Four- 
teenth Article  of  our  own  Confession:  "  De  ordine  ecclesiastico  do- 
cent,  quod  nemo  debeat  in  ecclesia  publice  docere  aut  sacramenta 
administrare,  nisi  rite  vocatus." 

The  Harmony  of  this  Article  with  the  Teachings  of  God's 

Word. 

But  a  question  of  greater  importance  concerning  this  Article  of 
our  Confession  is,  not  whether  it  accords  with  the  teachings  of 
other  Confessions,  for  they  and  it  may  possibly  both,  as  uninspired 
and  merely  human  productions,  be  wrong,  but  whether  it  accords 
with  the  teachings  of  the  word  of  God.  That  alone  is  infallible. 
All  Confessions  are  right  in  so  far — and  only  in  so  far — as  they 
agree  with  it  and  teach  what  it  teaches.  "  To  the  law  and  to  the 
testimony:  if  they  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because 
there  is  no  light  in  them."  (Isaiah  viii.  20.)  But,  concerning  the 
teachings  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  upon  the  point  under  considera- 
tion, there  can  be  no  possible  room  for  doubt.  They  are  most  ex- 
plicit in  declaring,  both  by  example  and  precept,  both  by  assertion 
and  inference,  that  only  he  who  has  first  been  rightly  called  and  in- 
ducted to  the  office  of  the  ministry  can  or  dare  with  safety  assume 
the  discharge  of  its  functions.  This  is  so  repeatedly  and  specifically 
declared  that  it  would  be  comparatively  easy  to  fill  pages  with  cita- 
tions of  passages  in  the  way  of  evidence ;  and  a  vastly  harder  task 
would  be  to  quote  even  one  instance  where,  with  divine  approbation 
and  blessing,  men  publicly  proclaimed  God's  word  or  administered 
his  ordinances  unless  they  were  first  called  and  commissioned  so  to 
do.  "  For  God  is  not  the  author  of  confusion,  but  of  peace,  as  in 
all  churches  of  the  saints."     (i  Cor.  xiv.  33.) 

Moses  did  not  of  his  own  accord  assume  the  office  of  law-giver 
and  leader  of  the  people  of  Israel,  but  God  called  him  to  it  when  he 
spake  to  him  out  of  the  burning  bush  in  the  wilderness.     (Ex.  iii. 


462  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

10-18.)  Aaron  entered  the  office  of  priest  only  when  once  he  had 
received  from  the  Lord,  by  the  hands  of  Moses,  his  commission  to 
enter  upon  it.  "And  the  Lord  said  to  Aaron,  '  Go  into  the  wilder- 
ness to  meet  Moses.'  And  he  went,  and  met  him  in  the  mount  of 
God,  and  kissed  him.  And  Moses  told  Aaron  all  the  words  of  the 
Lord  who  had  sent  him,  and  all  the  signs  which  he  had  commanded 
him."  (Ex.  iv.  27,  28.)  The  Levitical  priesthood,  also,  was  not  a 
merely  assumed  human  undertaking;  but  the  tribe  of  Levi  was 
separated  by  God  himself  from  all  the  other  tribes,  and,  by  special 
and  solemn  services  of  consecration,  were  devoted  to  their  sacred 
duties.  (Numb.  iii.  5-13.)  The  prophets,  also,  who  were  true 
prophets  of  God,  were  called  and  sent  forth  upon  their  prophetic 
mission,  with  clear  and  undeniable  credentials.  Some,  it  is  true, 
at  various  times,  assumed  to  prophesy  in  God's  name,  just  as  some 
do  now,  whom  God  did  not  send,  and  upon  whom  he  denounces  his 
severe  displeasure.  "  I  have  not  sent  them,  saith  the  Lord,  yet  they 
prophesy  a  lie  in  my  name ;  that  I  might  drive  you  out,  and  that  ye 
might  perish;  ye,  and  the  prophets  that  prophesy  unto  you."  (Jer. 
xxvii.  15.)  But  God's  true  prophets  were  all  called  to  prophesy. 
God  called,  inspired,  commissioned  them.  They  ran  because  he 
sent  them.  Their  message  was  the  "  burden  of  the  Lord  "  to  the 
people.  And  the  people  recognized  them  as  thus  being  God's 
prophets — men  filling  a  special  office — and  consecrated,  with 
authority,  to  a  separate  and  holy  work.  Thus  was  Samuel,  the 
head  of  the  prophetic  college,  directly  called.  "  The  Lord  called 
Samuel  and  he  answered  'Here  am  I.'"  (i  Sam.  iii.  4.)  The 
"visions"  which  Isaiah  saw  and  uttered,  were  visions  which  God  re- 
vealed to  him,  and  bade  him  make  known.  (Isaiah  i.  i.)  Jere- 
miah's commission  predates  even  his  birth:  "Then  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  unto  me,  saying,  'Before  I  formed  thee  in  the  belly,  I 
knew  thee ;  and  before  thou  earnest  forth  out  of  the  womb,  I  sancti- 
fied thee,  and  ordained  thee  a  prophet  unto  the  nations.'"  (Jer.  i. 
4,  5.)  The  same  is  true,  also,  of  all  the  prophets:  they  did  not 
prophesy  until  they  were  called  and  moved  by  God  to  do  so.  And 
not  only  did  God  thus,  under  the  old  dispensation,  throw  a  sanctity 
around  the  priestly  and  prophetic  offices  by  specially  calling  and 
endowing  men  to  fill  them,  but  he  declared  this  sanctity  in  a  yet 
more  impressive  manner,  namely  by  the  sudden  and  fearful  displays 
of  his  displeasure  with  which   he,   on  several   occasions  at   least, 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  463 

visited  those  who,  without  being  called  and  separated  to  the  work, 
irreverently  assumed  the  functions  of  these  offices.  "Thou  shalt 
appoint  Aaron  and  his  sons,"  said  God  to  Moses,  "and  they  shall 
wait  on  their  priest's  office;  and  the  stranger  that  cometh  nigh  shall 
be  put  to  death."  (Num.  iii.  10.)  When  Miriam  and  Aaron 
murmured  against  Moses,  and  said,  "  Hath  the  Lord  spoken  only 
by  Moses?  Hath  he  not  spoken  also  by  us?"  the  anger  of  the 
Lord  was  kindled  against  them,  and  when  "  the  cloud  departed 
from  off  the  Tabernacle,  behold  Miriam  was  leprous  white  as  snow." 
(Num.  xii.  i-io.)  The  case,  also,  of  King  Uzziah  is  a  striking  one 
in  proof  of  God's  displeasure  against  those  who  dare  to  intrude 
themselves,  uncalled,  into  the  priestly  or  ministerial  office. 
(2  Chron.  xxvi.  16-21.)  Very  signally,  also,  did  God  display  his 
displeasure  against  all  unbidden  or  uncalled  assumption  of  official 
and  sacred  duties,  in  the  case  of  Uzzah,  when  the  Ark  was  brought 
by  David  from  Kirjath-jearim  to  Jerusalem.  (2  Sam.  vi.  3-7.)  And 
similarly  did  he  also  show  his  anger  against  all  such  irreverent  pre- 
sumption when  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat,  the  wicked  king  w^io 
made  Israel  to  sin,  once  stood  by  the  altar  to  burn  incense.  When 
the  prophet  denounced  him  for  it,  and  he  stretched  out  his  hand  to 
seize  and  punish  the  prophet,  "  his  hand  which  he  put  forth  against 
him,  dried  up  so  that  he  could  not  pull  it  in  again  to  him." 
(l  Kings  xiii.  1-4.) 

Examples,  in  proof  of  the  position  that  only  those  who  are  rightly 
called  should  perform  ministerial  acts,  abound  also  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  harbinger  of  the  Messiah,  John  the  Baptist,  was 
"filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  even  from  his  mother's  womb,"  to  go 
before  the  coming  Redeemer  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah,  to 
turn  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to  the  children,  and  the  disobedient  to 
the  wisdom  of  the  just;  to  make  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the 
Lord."  (Luke  i.  15-17.)  The  Seventy  had  their  commission 
directly  from  the  Master,  and  were  sent  by  him,  "two  and  two,  into 
every  city  and  place  whither  he  himself  would  come."  (Luke  x.  i.) 
So  especially  were  the  Twelve  called  and  ordained  to  their  special 
office.  "And  he  called  unto  him  the  twelve,  and"  began  to  send 
them  forth  by  two  and  two."  (Mark  vi.  7.)  "  Ye  have  not  chosen 
me,  but  I  have  chosen  you,  and  ordained  you  that  ye  should  go 
and  bring  forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  remain."  (John  xv. 
16.)     And  so   when  Judas,  one  of  these  twelve,  by  transgression 


464  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

fell,  his  place,  whether  properly  or  not,  was  filled  by  the  election  of 
Matthias  to  the  apostleship,  thus  showing  at  least  that  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem  believed  a  "  call  "  to  the  office  necessary  before  assum- 
ing the  duties  of  the  office.  St.  Paul's  call  was  a  direct  and  miracu- 
lous one.  The  apostle  Paul,  writing  to  Timothy,  exhorts  him  "  not 
to  neglect  the  gift  which  was  in  him,  which  was  given  him  by 
prophecy,  and  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery  "  (i  Tim. 
iv.  14),  and,  himself  thus  a  called  and  ordained  minister,  he  bids  him 
ordain  others  to  the  same  office,  saying,  "  and  the  things  that  thou 
hast  heard  of  me  among  many  witnesses,  the  same  commit  thou  to 
faithful  men  who  shall  be  able  to  teach  others  also."  (2  Tim.  ii.  2.) 
And  the  same  exhortation  he  addresses,  also,  to  Titus,  saying,  "for 
this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete  that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the 
things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every  city  as  I  had 
appointed  thee."  (Tit.  i.  5.)  The  apostle,  also,  bids  Timothy  "lay 
hands  suddenly  on  no  man,"  i.  c.  not  in  too  much  haste  to  ordain 
any  one  to  the  work  of  the  ministry,  lest  one  not  rightly  or  truly 
called  would  thus  be  inducted  by  him  into  the  sacred  office,  who 
would  do  much  harm,  and  Timothy  himself  would  thus  become 
partaker  of  his  sins,  (i  Tim.  v.  22).  Paul  and  Barnabas,  also,  in 
their  missionary  journey,  not  only  confirmed  the  souls  of  the  dis- 
ciples, and  exhorted  them  to  continue  in  the  faith,  but  they  also,  we 
read,  "ordained  them  elders  in  every  church  "  (Acts  xiv.  23),  i.  e. 
set  apart  by  ordination  certain  chosen  and  qualified  men  as  pastors 
of  the  churches.  And,  as  the  highest  possible  proof  of  the  point 
under  consideration,  let  us  never  forget  that  even  our  Saviour, 
although  divine  and  possessed  of  an  anointing  for  his  official  work 
from  all  eternity,  yet  did  not  enter  upon  it,  or  assume  the  public 
discharge  of  its  functions,  until  he  was  first,  by  Baptism  and  the 
descent  upon  him  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  solemnly  and  visibly  set  apart 
to  it  and  inaugurated  into  his  Messianic  or  ministerial  office.  (Matt. 
iii.    13-17.) 

The  Scriptures,  however,  teach  this  truth  of  the  necessity  of  a 
call  to  the  ministry  by  many  specific  precepts  and  inferences  also. 
The  Saviour,  c.  g.,  in  many  of  his  parables,  where  the  servants 
(ministers)  are  represented  as  being  employed,  directed,  and  re- 
warded by  God  as  the  Great  Householder  and  the  Lord  of  the 
Vineyard,  thus  teaches  it.  {^See  Dr.  DieJils  Essay,  Lutheran  Diet, 
Vol.  I,  p.  266).     The  same  is  implied,  also,  in  his  exhortation  to  his 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  465 

iollowers  to  pray  that  men  may  be  raised  up,  qualified  and  sent 
forth  to  labor  in  the  Church  as  ministers :  "  Pray  ye,  therefore,  the 
Lord  of  the  harvest  that  he  will  send  forth  laborers  into  his  harvest." 
(Matt.  ix.  38.)  Above  all,  the  Saviour's  commission  to  the  Apostles, 
and  to  the  ministry  of  all  ages,  teaches  it.  "  All  power,"  he  de- 
clares, "is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye,  therefore, 
and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you."  (Matt,  xxviii.  18-20.) 
And  .the  same  is  also  repeatedly  declared  in  the  writings  of  the 
Apostles,  "  God  hath  set  some  in  the  Church,  first  apostles,  second- 
arily prophets,  thirdly  teachers,  after  that  miracles,  then  gifts  of 
healing,  helps,  governments,  diversities  of  tongues.  Are  all  apostles  ? 
are  all  prophets?  are  all  teachers?  are  all  workers  of  miracles? 
have  all  the  gifts  of  healing?  do  all  speak  with  tongues?  do  all 
interpret?"  (i  Cor.  xii.  28-30.)  "  God  hath  given  to  us  the  ministry 
of  reconciliation."  (2  Cor.  v.  18.)  "  Let  a  man  so  account  of  us  as 
the  ministers  of  Christ  and  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God."  (i  Cor. 
iv.  II.)  And  James  (iii.  i)  exhorts:  "My  brethren,  be  not  many 
masters  or  teachers  {ihi^aaKaXoi),  knowing  that  we  shall  receive  the 
greater  condemnation;"  /.  e.  let  not  many  aspire  to  be  religious 
teachers  or  guides  to  the  Church,  for  not  many  are  qualified  or 
called  to  be,  and  only  those  who  are  qualified  and  called  should  be. 
Or,  as  Luther  renders  it:  "  Lieben  briider,  unterwinde  sich  nicht 
yedermann  Lehrer  zu  sein;  und  wisset  das  wnr  desto  mehr  Urtheil 
empfangen  werden." 

Beyond  all  possibility,  then,  in  view  of  the  passages  which  have 
now  been  cited,  of  honest  doubt  or  refutation,  it  stands  proven  from 
the  word  of  God  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  "  Ca/l  to  the  Minis- 
try" and  that  as  this  Article  of  our  Confession  teaches,  "  no  man 
should  publicly  in  the  church  teach  or  administer  the  sacraments 
except  he  be  rightly  called,"  i.  c,  really  has  this  right  or  regular  call. 
Or,  as  St.  Paul  expresses  it:  "No  man  taketh  {i.  e.,  ought  to  take) 
this  honor  unto  himself  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron." 
(Heb.  V.  4.) 


466  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Harmony  of  the  Article  with  the  Views  of  Luther  and  of 
THE  Great  Lutheran  Dogmaticians. 

The  views  of  Luther  and  of  the  great  Lutheran  dogmaticians 
are,  of  course,  all  in  entire  accord  with  the  teachings  of  this  Article 
of  our  Confession  which  we  are  now  considering.  With  one  voice 
all  assert  the  necessity  of  a  "  rite  vocatits"  before  assuming  the  dis- 
charge of  ministerial  acts  or  duties.  Luther,  it  is  true,  was  charged 
by  the  Romanists  with  virtually,  by  his  teachings,  abrogating  the 
ministerial  office,  and  with  breaking  down  all  distinction  between 
the  ministry  and  the  laity.  But  no  charge  ever  preferred  against 
the  great  Reformer  was  more  utterly  false  and  groundless. 

Luther  held  that  all  Christians,  in  Baptism,  become  priests,  and 
are  endowed  with  all  the  spiritual  rights  and  duties  of  priests.  But 
he  made  a  distinction,  for  the  sake  ot  order  and  in  simple  justice  on 
the  part  of  one  toward  others,  between  the  possession  of  priestly 
rights  and  duties  and  the  exeixise  of  those  rights  and  duties.  The 
exercise  of  these  priestly  functions,  he  held,  was  a  limited  one,  by 
virtue  of  the  fact  that  every  Christian  is  a  member  of  a  communion, 
the  Church.  If  every  one,  according  to  his  own  pleasure,  where 
and  whenever  it  may  please  him,  should  assume  to  perform  his 
priestly  duties,  he  would,  by  so  doing,  interfere  with  the  rights  of 
his  fellow  Christians,  and  would  thereby  bring  about  an  injurious 
or  destructive  confusion  in  the  Church.  All  individual  Christians 
cannot  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  time  exercise  the  func- 
tions of  their  Christian  priesthood  toward  others.  This  is  simply 
impossible,  and,  under  ordinary  or  normal  circumstances,  where 
there  is  a  church,  it  is  also  entirely  unnecessary.  The  church  or 
congi-egation  as  an  organic  unit  or  whole,  Luther  held,  is  bound  to 
preach  the  word  of  God;  but  she  can,  of  course,  do  this  only 
through  individual  persons  ivhom  she  has  thereto  authorized  and 
commissioned.  These  individual  persons  whom  she  thus  authorizes 
and  commissions  speak  in  her  name  and  in  her  stead.  She,  the 
Church,  speaks  by  the  mouth  of  these  individual  persons,  who  are 
her  instruments.     She,  however,  is  really  the  person  speaking. 

Thus  is  there,  according  to  this  view,  in  the  Chuch  and  grounded 
in  her  very  being,  a  cJmrcJi  office,  viz.,  the  office  of  the  ministry. 
She  cannot  live  without  it.  Where  the  Church  is  there  is  also  this 
office,  and   there  also  will   its   functions  be  exercised.     And  each 


THE    Call   to    THE    MINLSTRY.  467 

Christian,  in  the  exercise  of  the  functions  of  the  ministerial  office 
by  those  appointed  b}'  the  Church  thereto,  sees  the  fulfilment  of  the 
command  which  makes  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  the  duty  of  the 
entire  Christian  communion,  as  also  his  own  individual  duty.  And 
thus,  also,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  are  there  limits  set  to  each 
Christian  in  the  exercise  of  his  priestly  rights  and  duties,  beyond 
which,  as  one  in  a  body  where  all  have  equal  rights  and  duties,  he 
neither  need  nor  dare  justly  go. 

Luther's  words,  in  thus  teaching  that  the  ministerial  office 
grounds  itself  in  an  obligation  resting  upon  the  Church  as  a  whole, 
have  been  interpreted  as  if  he  rested  the  existence  of  the  ministerial 
office  wholly  upon  a  \oluntary  contract,  entered  into  between  a  cer- 
tain number  of  Christians  who,  by  mutual  consent,  conferred  upon 
one  of  their  number  that  which  was  the  duty  oi  each  of  them.  This 
has  been  declared  too  slender  a  foundation  upon  which  to  rest  the 
office,  imperiling  the  very  existence  of  the  same.  But,  in  supposing 
this  to  have  been  Luther's  view  of  the  office  of  the  ministry,  injus- 
tice is  perhaps  done  him.  Luther  did,  indeed,  teach  that  in  the 
official  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  ministry  by  those  elected  or 
ordained  to  the  office,  every  Christian  could  and  should  see  a  dis- 
charge of  his  own  duties,  as  one  of  the  universal  priesthood,  and 
that  he  should  recognize  himself  as  having  conferred  upon  the  one 
officiating  the  exercise  of  his  duty  as  far  as  it  is  a  public  or  congre- 
gational duty.  But  in  thus  teaching,  Luther  by  no  means  held  that 
in  this  lay  the  root  or  origin  of  the  office,  as  though  it  were  created 
by  or  sprung  merely  from  some  such  contract  made  by  men.  On 
the  contrary,  he  clearly  recognized  the  root  of  the  office  as  one 
planted  by  God  himself  He  knew  that  as  the  Church  is  before  the 
individual  Christian,  so  also  is  the  office  of  the  ministry,  or  all  offi- 
cial action,  before  the  action  of  the  individual.  He  repeatedly  asserts 
that  the  Church  cannot  be  without  the  office;  and  it  is  not  left  to  the 
option  of  individual  Christians,  be  their  number  ever  so  great,  whether 
or  not  there  sliall  be  an  office.  By  their  agreement  they  do  not  create 
the  office,  but  they  simply  fill  the  office,  already  existing,  with  a 
man  of  their  choice.  They  simply  make  an  office-bearer.  The 
consecration  by  the  bishop,  Luther  wrote  to  the  German  nobility,  is 
nothing  else  than  as  if  he,  instead  of  and  in  the  name  of  the  whole 
assembly,  took  one  of  the  number,  all  having  inherently  equal  power 
or  rights,  and  set  him  apart  to  exercise  this  power  or  right  for  the 


468  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

rest.  Or,  it  is  as  if  ten  brothers,  princes,  equal  heirs,  should  choose 
one  of  their  number  to  administer  the  inheritance  for  them.  The 
royal  or  princely  right  is  there,  and  belongs  to  all ;  the  administration 
of  the  same  is,  however,  conferred  upon  one.  The  same  is  true  of 
the  office  of  the  ministry  and  the  election  or  appointment  of  men  to 
fill  the  same.  The  office  exists.  It  exists  in  the  Church,  in  which, 
as  equal  spiritual  priests,  all  Christians  have  equal  priestly  rights 
and  duties,  and  some  of  whom  the  Church  thus,  out  of  her  own 
number,  chooses  and  sets  apart  to  discharge  for  the  rest  the  public 
priestly  functions  devolving  inherently  upon  each  and  all.  Hence, 
since  the  office  is  a  permanent  one  in  the  Church,  there  remains  no 
occasion  for  each  individual  Christian  to  exercise  his  priesthood  in 
public  teaching;  nay,  simply  because  there  is  such  an  office,  and 
that  office  is  filled  by  men  whom  the  Church  has  specially  appointed 
to  the  office,  it  becomes  the  duty  of  all  not  thus  appointed  to  be 
silent  and  not  assume  thus  to  teach.  From  the  very  beginning  of 
his  work,  Luther  insisted  upon  it  that  only  those  thus  called  to  the 
office  of  the  ministry  should  discharge  the  duties  of  that  office.  He 
distinguished  sharply  between  the  right  and  the  exercise  of  the 
right.  All  Christians,  he  taught,  are  priests,  but  all  are  not  pastors. 
[Vide  Plitfs  Eiiileitung  in  die  Augustana,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  370—372.) 
"  Either  show,"  he  indignantly  writes  to  those  assuming  to  teach 
without  a  call,  "either  show  your  call  and  command  to  preach,  or 
keep  silence  and  presume  not  to  preach.  For  here  an  office  is  in 
question,  yea  an  office  of  preaching.  But  an  office  no  one  can  have 
without  a  command  and  call."  {Erlangen  Ed.,  31,  218.)  Again: 
"  There  must  be  bishops,  pastors,  or  teachers,  who  publicly  and 
specially  administer  the  four  things  mentioned  above,  on  account 
and  in  the  name  of  the  Church,  but  by  the  appointment  of  Christ, 
as  St.  Paul  says,  Eph.  iv.  11.  For  the  multitude  cannot  do  this, 
but  must  commit  it,  or  have  it  committed,  to  an  individual.  What 
would  the  consequence  otherwise  be,  if  each  would  speak  and 
officiate,  and  none  would  give  way  to  the  other?  It  must  be  com- 
mitted to  one  alone,  and  he  alone  must  be  permitted  to  preach. 
The  rest  must  all  hold  their  peace  and  consent  to  it."  {Erlangen 
Edition,  25,  364.)  And  very  emphatically  does  he  repel  the  slanders 
of  his  enemies  upon  this  point,  in  writing  to  Emser  in  1521 :  "  Thou 
sayest  falsely  that  I  make  bishops,  priests  and  pastors  of  all  laymen, 
and  teach  that  they  may  officiate  without  a  call ;  and,  holy  as  thou 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  469 

art,  concealest  the  fact  that  I  also  write  that  no  one  should  pre- 
sume to  administer  the  office  without  being  called,  except  in  extreme 
necessity."     [Eriangcn  Eciition,  27,  255.     See,  also,  39,  215,  216.) 

No  one,  therefore,  held  more  clearly  and  tenaciously  to  the 
necessity  of  a  call  to  the  ministry,  before  assuming  the  duties  of  the 
ministry,  than  Luther.  If  necessary,  passage  upon  passage  could 
be  quoted  in  proof.  {Vide  Dr.  Walther's  "  Kirche  iind  A  fnt,"  pp. 
174-187,  also,  Prof.  M.  Loy,  "  The  Ministry"  pp.  74-106). 

Equally  clear  and  emphatic  in  their  utterances  upon  this  point 
are  all  the  leading  dogmaticians  of  our  Church  since  Luther's  day. 
With  unbroken  unanimity  they  insist  upon  what  our  Article  calls 
the  ''rite  vocatiis!' 

Thus  Chemnitz  declares: 

"All  Christians  are  indeed  priests  (i  Pet.  ii..  Rev.  i),  because 
they  offer  spiritual  sacrifices  to  God.  Each  one  also  at  his  own 
home  both  can  and  should  teach  the  word  of  God  (Deut.  vi.  7,  i 
Cor.  xiv).  Nevertheless  it  is  not  every  Christian  who  should  take 
upon  himself  the  public  ministry  of  the  word  and  sacraments.  For 
not  all  are  apostles,  not  all  are  teachers  (i  Cor.  xii.  29),  but  those 
only  who  by  a  special  and  legitimate  call  from  God,  {sed  qui  pccii- 
liari  et  legitivda  vocatione  a  Deo  ad  hoc  ministerium  segregati  sunt) 
are  set  apart  to  this  ministry."  {Exam.  Cone.  Trid.,  IL,  de  s.  ord.  c.  i). 

And  again : 

"  It  is  certain  from  the  word  of  God  that  in  the  Church  no  one 
ought  to  to  be  heard  who  has  not  been  lawfully  called.  For  Paul 
distinctly  says,  (Rom.  x.  15)  that  they  cannot  preach,  i.  e.  by  right, 
even  though  they  may  actually  attempt  it,  who  have  not  been  sent. 
And  in  Jer.  xxiii.  21,  God  complains:  'I  have  not  sent  these 
prophets,  yet  they  ran.'  Indeed,  the  churches  ought  not  and  cannot 
with  any  profit,  hear  those  who  have  not  testimonies  of  a  lawful 
call."     {De  Ecc/esia,  3,  119.) 

Gerhard  says : 

"We  must  distinguish  between  the  ^tv/^r^/ command  and  voca- 
tion {distingucndmn  enini  inter  generate  viandatuni  et  vocationeni) 
which  all  the  pious  receive  when  they  are  made  Christians,  *  *  * 
and  the  special  vocation  or  call,  {et  inter  specialein  vocationeni)  by 
which  the  administration  of  the  word  and  sacraments  in  the  public 
assembly  of  the  Church  is,  by  the  Church's  public  consent,  entrusted 
to  certain  suitable  persons,  which  vocation  is  not  common  to  all 
31 


470  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

Christians,  as  appears  from    i   Cor.  xii.   29;  Eph.  \v.   ii ;  {Loci  The- 
ologici.  De  Ministerio  Ecclesiastico,  Sec.  67.) 

Quenstedt  says : 

"When,  in  the  Church  properly  estabhshed  through  the  word, 
the  regular  or  appointed  ministers  of  the  Church  rightly  discharge 
the  duties  of  their  office,  it  is  permitted  no  one  to  enter  the  office  of 
teaching  without  a  legitimate  call,  but  it  is  in  every  way  necessary 
that  each  one  be  legitimately  called  and  chosen,  even  a  special  calling 
is  necessary  in  order  to  enter  (rightly)  the  office  of  the  ministry,  so 
that,  without  it,  it  is  permitted  no  one  to  teach  publicly  in  the 
Church,  and  to  administer  the  sacraments  Augs.  Conf  Art.  XIV., 
etc.  Vide  Quensicdfs  Theologia  Didactico  Poleinica,  Pars  Qiiarta, 
Caput  XII.,  Sectio  II.,  p.  397). 

Carpzov  says : 

"  Access  to  the  office  of  public  instruction  is  granted  to  no  one 
unless  he  has  in  due  form  been  first  called." 

Hunnius  says: 

"  No  one  who  desires  to  be  a  minister  of  God  ought  to  push  him- 
self into  the  office,  but  ought  to  be  properly  ordained  for  this  pur- 
pose."    {Epitome  Credendorum,  Etig.  trans.,  p.  240.) 

Hollazius,  in  answer  to  the  question,  "  Qind  est  Ministerium  Ec- 
clesiasticinn  ?  "  says : 

"  Ministerium  ecclesiasticum  est  officium  sacrum  et  publicum  di- 
vinitus  institutum,  et  certis  atque  idoneis  hominibus  legitimam  voca- 
tionem  commendatum,  ut  peculiari  potestate  instructi  verbum  Dei 
doceant,  Sacramenta  administrent,  et  disciplinam  ecclesiasticam  con- 
servent  ad  gloriam  Dei,  hominum  que  salutem  promovendam," — 
{Vide  Hollaz.,  Examcn  de  Min.  EccL,  Pars  iv.,  Cap.  2,  p.  859.) 

Thus,  with  one  consent,  do  our  great  Lutheran  theologians  en- 
force this  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  a  call  to  the  ministry,  and  thus 
do  all  repeat  and  emphasize  the  truth  taught  in  our  Article,  viz., 
"  that  no  man  should  publicly  in  the  Church  teach  or  administer 
the  Sacrament  except  he  be  rightly  called,  or  without  a  regular 
call." 

And  yet  this  discharge  of  ministerial  duties  is  not  always  and 
absolutely  to  be  limited  only  to  those  who  by  a  right  call  have 
been  placed  in  the  ministerial  office.  The  rule  has  its  exception. 
Under  certain  special  circumstances,  any  Christian,  even  though  he 
be  not  a  minister,  may  and  should  exercise  at  least  some  of  the 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  47 1 

functions  of  the  ministry.  From  Luther  down  through  the  entire 
line  of  our  Lutheran  dogmaticians,  it  has  by  all  been  freely  admitted 
and  taught  that,  in  all  cases  of  absolute  necessity,  any  Christian  lay- 
man, and  even  any  Christian  woman,  may  preach  the  word,  admin- 
ister baptism,  and  pronounce  absolution.  This  exception,  like  the 
rule  itself,  although,  of  course,  for  a  very  different  reason,  springs 
from  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  each  Christian.  In  the  former  case, 
or  in  the  observance  of  the  rule  as  expressed  in  Article  XIV.  of  our 
Confession,  there  is  on  the  part  of  each  individual  Christian  a  with- 
Jiolding  of  the  exercise  of  his  priestly  rights,  out  of  regard  to  the 
equal  priestly  rights  of  his  fellow  Christians;  and  in  the  latter  case, 
i.  e.,  when  in  a  case  of  necessity,  although  not  in  the  office  of  the 
ministry,  he  performs  ministerial  duties,  he  simply  resumes  the  exer- 
cise of  his  rights,  and  he  discharges  those  duties  on  the  strength  of 
his  commission  as  one  of  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers. 

And  hence  the  Appendix  to  the  Smalcald  Articles  says :  "  In  case 
of  necessit}',  a  mere  layman  may  absolve  another  and  become  his 
pastor;  as  St.  Augustine  relates  that  two  Christians  were  in  a  ship 
together,  the  one  baptized  the  other,  and  afterward  was  absolved  by 
him."     {Book  of  Concord,  Eng.  trans.,  p.  568.) 

Luther  says : 

"  If  a  number  of  pious  laymen  were  taken  prisoners  and  placed 
in  a  wilderness,  without  a  priest  consecrated  by  a  bishop,  and  these 
agreed  among  themselves  to  elect  one  of  their  number,  whether 
married  or  not,  and  commit  to  him  the  office  of  baptizing,  adminis- 
tering the  Eucharist,  absolving  and  preaching,  he  Avould  undoubt- 
edly be  a  priest,  as  much  so  as  if  all  bishops  and  popes  had  or- 
dained him.  Hence  it  is  that,  in  case  of  necessity,  every  one  can 
baptize  and  absolve,  which  would  not  be  possible  if  we  were  not  all 
priests."     {Luther s  Works,  Erlangen  Edition,  21,  282.) 

Gerhard,  L.  T.  {De  Min.  Ecc,  §  74) : 

"  In  a  case  of  extreme  necessity,  when  a  man  must  either  depart 
without  baptism  or  baptism  must  be  administered  by  a  private  per- 
son, it  is  better  that  baptism  be  administered  by  a  private  person 
than  that  the  man  should  depart  without  baptism;  nevertheless,  the 
administration  of  baptism  ordinarily  belongs  to  the  ministers  of  the 
Church." 

Hollazius  {Exanien  Theologicuni  De  Min.  Ecc,  q.  viii.,  obs.  2): 

"In  the  collecting  and  establishing  of  a  Church,  where  there  are 


472  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

not  those  present  who,  having  been  ordinarily  called,  may  teach, 
nor  any  at  hand  to  give  a  call,  in  this  extreme  case  of  necessity, 
where  the  glory  of  God  and  the  salvation  of  our  neighbors  are 
alone  to  be  regarded,  we  willingly  grant  that  any  Christian  is 
bound  to  instil  the  catechetical  milk  of  righteousness  to  those  un- 
skilled in  speech." 

lb.  [De  Baptismo,  q.  iv.) : 

"  Extraordinarily  and  in  case  of  necessity,  any  pious  Christian, 
whether  male  or  female,  acquainted  with  sacred  rites,  can  adminis- 
ter baptism." 

lb.  [De  Eiicharista,  q.  iv.) : 

"  Not  even  in  a  case  of  necessity  is  the  administration  of  the 
Holy  Supper  to  be  committed  to  a  layman  or  private  Christian; 
because  there  is  a  distinction  in  this  respect  between  Baptism,  which 
is  a  sacrament  of  initiation,  and  the  Eucharist,  which  is  a  sacrament 
of  confirmation.  Concerning  the  necessity  of  Baptism,  Christ  bears 
witness  (John  iii.  5).  But  the  use  of  the  Holy  Supper  has  not  been 
made  of  equal  necessity;  and  therefore  when  there  can  be  no  re- 
course to  the  ordinary  ministry,  then  the  remark  of  Augustine  is  in 
place:  'Believe  and  thou  hast  eaten.'  " 

Thus,  in  case  of  necessity,  as  Luther  and  all  our  theologians  ad- 
mit, may  those  not  in  the  ministerial  office  or  those  not  having  what 
our  Article  designates  the  ''rite  vocatiis''  perform  ministerial  acts. 
But  let  it  be  clearly  observed  that  where  this  is  allowed  there  must 
be  a  real  and  absolute  necessity.  In  all  other  cases  it  is  irregular 
and  wrong  for  a  layman  to  usurp  the  functions  of  the  ministry. 
Where  a  minister  is  present,  or  where  the  presence  and  service  of  a 
minister  could  in  any  way  be  secured,  there  it  is  the  minister  alone 
who  can  rightly  preach  the  word  or  administer  the  sacraments;  and 
for  a  layman  there  and  under  such  circumstances  to  attempt  these 
duties,  is  unwarranted  presumption.  Our  great  Luther  in  all  that  he 
wrote  upon  the  priestly  rights  and  duties  of  laymen,  was  nevertheless 
always  most  careful  to  guard  jealously  the  distinctive  prerogatives  of 
the  ministerial  office,  and  he  always  strenuously  asserted  that  there 
must  be  an  actual  and  extreme  necessity  in  order  to  justify  a  layman  in 
publticly  teaching  in  the  Church  or  administering  the  sacraments. 
This  belonged,  not  to  the  spiritual  priesthood,  but  to  the  pastoral 
office;  and  only  by  those  in  the  office,  save  in  case  of  extreme  neces- 
sity, shall  these  duties  be  discharged.      "  In  einer  Gemeinde,"  he 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    ISHNISTRV.  473 

writes,  "  da  Jedem  das  recht  frei  ist,  soil  sich  deselbigen  niemand  an- 
nehmen  ohne  der  ganzen  Gemeinde  Willen  und  Ervvahlung;  aber  in 
der  Noth  brattclie sich  deselbigen  wer  da  zvill."  (W.,  x.,  1858.)  Again: 
"  Niemand  soil  selbst  sich  des  unberufen  unterwinden  cs  ware  denn 
die  aiisscrste  Noth!'  (VValch.,  xviii.,  1597.)  And  again,  upon  the 
supposition  that  the  Christian  is  where  there  is  no  Church  and  no 
ordained  ministry,  and  where  all  around  him  are  perishing  in  sin, 
he  writes,  "  In  solchem  Falle  sieht  ein  Christ  aus  briiderlicher  Liebe 
die  Noth  der  armen  verdorbenen  Seelen  an,  und  wartet  nicht  ob  ihm 
Befehle  oder  Brief  von  Fiirsten  oder  Brief  von  Bischofen  gegeben 
werde,  den  NotJi  bricht  allc  Gcsctze  und  hat  kcin  Gesetz."  (Walch., 
X.,  1801-3.) 

Laymen  being  thus  justified,  in  Luther's  judgment,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  the  functions  of  the  office  of  the  ministry,  only  in  case  of  the 
most  strenuous  necessity,  our  whole  modern  system  of  lay  evan- 
gelism or  lay  preaching  finds  no  countenance  whatever  in  his  teach- 
ings; and,  were  he  now  living,  above  that  of  all  others  would  his 
voice,  in  thunder  tones,  be  raised  against  it,  condemning  it  as  un- 
scriptural  in  principle  and  unprofitable  and  injurious  in  practice. 
Would  it  not  be  well,  merely  for  the  sake  of  consistency  if  for  no 
other  and  higher  reason,  if  those  bearing  the  Lutheran  name  and 
boasting  at  times  so  loudly  of  their  Lutheran  relationship,  were  also 
to  know  more  of  Luther's  sound  and  conservative  views  upon  this 
whole  subject  and  adhere  more  to  his  wise  and  judicious  example 
with  regard  to  it. 

The  Constituent  Elements  or  Factors  of  the"  Rite  Vocatus" 
AS  Required  by  this  Article. 

But  what,  let  us  now  ask,  is  this  "call  to  the  ministry,"  or  this 
"rite  vocatus,"  which  is  thus  demanded  by  our  Article?  What  are 
its  constituent  elements?     In  what  does  it  essentially  consist? 

I .  This  right  call  to  the  ministerial  office  consists,  first  of  all,  in  the 
possession  of  the  needed  ndnisterial  gifts  and  qualifications. 

We  may  assume,  as  an  a  priori  truth,  that  God  calls  no  one  into 
the  office  of  the  ministry  whom  he  has  not  beforehand  qualified  for 
that  office.  Having  revealed  in  his  word  what  gifts  and  qualifica- 
tions a  true  bishop  or  pastor  must  possess,  he  would,  in  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  call  those  only  who  possess  the  gifts  and  qualifi- 
cations thus  required.     Besides,  the  ministry  being  pre-eminently  a 


474  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

peculiar  and  special  work,  in  its  very  nature  unlike  all  other  voca- 
tions, and  hence  requiring  special  and  peculiar  gifts  and  endow- 
ments, fitting  a  man  for  it,  and  necessary  in  order  to  render  him 
happy  and  successful  in  it,  we  must  take  it  for  granted  that  God,  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  calls  no  one  to  this  special  work  without  also  con- 
ferring upon  him  the  gifts  and  qualifications  necessary  for  it.  The 
very  fact,  therefore,  that  an  individual  is  possessed  of  the  special 
gifts  and  characteristics,  designated  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures  as 
qualifications  for  the  ministerial  office,  is  at  once,  in  itself,  an  indi- 
cation that  possibly  God  wills  him  to  enter  that  office.  The  con- 
ferring of  the  gifts  is,  in  part  at  least,  the  "  call."  It  is  a  divine 
revelation  of  the  divine  will  concerning  him ;  an  intimation  to  him 
from  heaven  of  what  his  life  mission  should  be  ;  a  true  voice  of  God 
calling  to  him,  out  of  the  very  depths  of  his  being,  saying:  "This 
is  the  way  which  I  have  marked  out  for  thee — walk  thou  in  it." 
Thus,  indeed,  God,  in  part  at  least,  indicates  to  every  man  his  provi- 
dential mission  in  life.  The  purpose  of  God  with  regard  to  every 
human  being  is  that  he  should  glorify  him  and  enjoy  him  forever. 
And  hence,  in  the  natural  or  constitutional  endowments  already  of 
each  one,  and  in  the  providential  orderings  and  spiritual  experiences 
of  his  life  afterward,  God  fits  one  human  being  thus  to  serve  and 
glorify  him  in  one  position  or  sphere  of  life,  and  another  in  a  dif- 
ferent position  or  sphere.  And  this  providential  designation  of  a 
man  to  a  particular  class  of  duties,  or  to  some  special  employment 
or  mode  of  life,  is,  on  this  very  account,  even  in  popular  language, 
spoken  of  as  his  "  calling."  What  a  man  is  clearly  and  evidently 
fitted  for,  that  also,  men  say,  he  is  called  to ;  and  what  he  has  no 
qualification  or  endowment  for,  that,  they  say,  he  is  not  called  to. 
And  so  emphatic  is  our  intuitive  recognition  of  this  truth  that  God 
designates  men  to  their  work  in  life,  by  the  very  talents  he  confers 
upon  them  or  withholds  from  them,  that  when  a  man  succeeds  in 
whatever  he  undertakes,  men  instinctively  say :  "  he  has  found  his 
calling;"  or,  if  he  fails,  they  say:  "he  has  mistaken  his  calling."  In 
either  case  there  is  the  clear  recognition  of  this  invisible,  yet  most 
positive  thing,  designated  the  man's  "calling;"  i.  e.  the  will  of  God 
framing  the  man's  being,  and  fitting  him  for  some  certain  and  espe- 
cial sphere  or  mission  in  life,  and  the  man  either  reading  that  will, 
and  falling  in  obediently  with  it,  and,  by  doing  so,  making  life  a 
success,  or  not  reading  it,  and  perpetually  going  counter  to  it,  and, 
in  consequence,  making  a  failure  of  life. 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  475 

Especially,  or  in  the  highest  and  fullest  possible  sense,  is  all  this 
true  with  regard  to  a  man's  calling  of  God  into  the  office  of  the 
ministry.  By  the  gifts  God  confers  upon  him,  by  the  fitness  for  the 
work  which  in  any  way  he  bestows  upon  him,  God  calls  him  to  the 
work,  and  makes  it  his  duty  to  assume  and  discharge  it.  In  that 
striking  and  beautiful  simile  which  the  apostle  uses  in  his  epistle  to 
the  Romans,  he  likens  the  Church  to  the  complex  human  body,  in 
which  the  members  not  only  differ  from  one  another,  while  each  is 
essential  to  the  whole,  but  the  office  and  functions  of  each,  also,  are 
determined  by  their  individual  fitness  for  their  respective  offices  and 
functions.  "  Having  then,"  is  his  language,  "gifts  differing  accord- 
ing to  the  grace  that  is  given  to  us,  whether  prophecy,  let  us 
prophesy  according  to  the  proportion  of  faith;  or  ministry,  let  us 
wait  on  our  ministering;  or  he  that  teacheth,  on  teaching;  or  he 
that  exhorteth,  on  exhortation."  (Rom.  xii.  6-7.)  And,  in  his 
letter  to  the  Corinthians  (i  Cor.  xii.  4),  he  expressly  refers  these 
personal  gifts  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  their  author,  and  declares  their 
express  object  or  design  to  be  to  qualify  those  who  are  so  gifted  for 
their  personal  and  respective  duties.  "  Now,  there  are  diversities 
of  gifts,  but  the  same  Spirit.  And  there  are  differences  of  adminis- 
trations, but  the  same  Lord.  And  there  are  diversities  of  oper- 
ations, but  it  is  the  same  God  which  worketh  all  in  all.  But  the 
manifestation  of  the  Spirit  is  given  to  every  man,  to  profit  withal. 
For  to  one  is  given  by  the  Spirit  the  word  of.  wisdom;  to  another 
the  word  of  knowledge  by  the  same  Spirit ;  to  another  faith  by  the 
same  Spirit;  to  another  the  gifts  of  healing  by  the  same  Spirit ;  to 
another,  the  working  of  miracles  ;  to  another,  prophecy  ;  to  another, 
discerning  of  spirits  ;  to  another,  divers  kinds  of  tongues  ;  to  another, 
the  interpretation  of  tongues  ;  but  all  these  worketh  that  one  and 
the  self-same  Spirit,  dividing  to  every  man  severally  as  he  will." 

As  regards  the  office  of  the  ministry,  therefore,  and  as  regards 
indeed  all  other  offices  and  duties  in  the  Church,  these  two  points, 
from  the  word  of  God,  are  clear — viz.  that  the  endowments  or  quali- 
fications which  men  may  possess  for  these  respective  offices  are  the 
gifts  to  them  of  God,  and  that  they  express,  both  to  their  possessor 
and  to  others  in  the  Church  around  him,  that  the  will  of  God  is  that 
he  upon  whom  he  has  thus  bestowed  such  gifts  should  exercise 
them  also  in  the  especial  office  or  duty  for  which  he  is  thus  especi- 
ally fitted.     Or,  in  other  words,  the  divine  endowment  of  a  man  for 


476  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  ministerial  office  constitutes  essentially  the  divine  ^' call,"  also, 
to  that  office;  and  the  will  of  God  that  a  man  should  be  in  the  office 
is  expressed  by  the  peculiar  fitness  which  he  gives  him  for  it. 

What  these  especial  gifts  and  endowments,  thus  qualifying  a  man 
for  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  thus  making  it  his  duty  to  enter 
it  and  labor  for  God's  glory  in  it,  are,  the  word  of  God,  as  also  the 
experience  of  the  Church,  clearly  reveal.  They  divide  themselves 
into  three  classes,  viz.  suitable  natural  endowments  both  of  body 
and  of  mind,  suitable  training  and  education  or  discipline  and  de- 
velopment of  these  natural  endowments,  and  then,  as  the  crown  of 
all,  suitable  spiritual  qualifications,  or  the  possession,  in  an  eminent 
degree,  of  the  fruit  and  unction  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  sanctifying  and 
consecrating  both  the  natural  endowments  and  the  educational  ac- 
quirements to  the  single  and  supreme  object  of  glorifying  God. 
The  first,  therefore,  is  the  bestowal  of  God  in  creation,  the  second 
in  providence,  and  the  third  in  grace;  each  his  gift,  and  each  neces- 
sary to  fit  a  man  for  the  office.  The  "  call "  implies  and  includes 
them  all. 

There  must,  first,  be  the  necessary  natural  endozvmejits ,  both  of  body 
and  of  mind.  There  must  be  proper  bodily  qualification.  It  is  ex- 
tremely doubtful  whether  God  calls  a  man  with  a  defective  or 
unhealthy  body  into  the  office  of  the  ministry.  Under  the  Old 
Testament  no  man  who  was  maimed  or  blemished  in  any  of  his 
bodily  members  was  allowed  to  enter  the  pnest's  office.  "  Speak 
unto  Aaron,  saying.  Whosoever  he  be  of  thy  seed  in  their  genera- 
tion that  hath  any  blemish,  let  him  not  approach  to  offer  the  bread 
of  his  God.  For  whatsoever  man  he  be  that  hath  a  blemish,  he 
shall  not  approach  :  a  blind  man,  or  a  lame,  or  he  that  hath  a  flat 
nose,  or  anything  superfluous,  or  a  man  that  is  broken-footed,  or 
broken-handed,  or  crooked-backed,  or  a  dwarf,  or  that  hath  a 
blemish  in  his  eye,  or  be  scurvy  or  scabbed;  no  man  that  hath  a 
blemish  of  the  seed  of  Aaron  the  priest  shall  come  nigh  to  offer  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire;  he  hath  a  blemish;  he  shall  not 
come  nigh  to  offer  the  bread  of  his  God."  (Lev.  xxi.  17-21.)  Of 
course  I  do  not  here  forget  that  this  requirement  of  bodily  perfec- 
tion existed  in  the  office  of  the  priesthood,  and  under  the  Old  Dis- 
pensation, which  was  largely  typical,  and  that  the  office  concerning 
whose  "  call  "  we  are  speaking,  is  the  office  of  the  ministry  under 
\k\Q  Neiv  ox  Gospel  Dispensation.     And  yet  I  also  remember  that  in 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY. 


477 


each  of  these  Old  Testament  requirements  we  have  an  expression, 
not  simply  of  the  divine  will  concerning  the  special  thing  to  which 
the  requirement  applies,  but  an  expression  also  of  that  will  concern- 
ing the  general  subject  or  object  with  which  that  special  require- 
ment stands  related  or  connected.  The  thing  specific  under  the 
Old  Dispensation  was,  the  order  of  the  priesthood,  and  the  thing 
specific  under  the  New  Dispensation  is  the  office  of  the  ministry, 
but  in  both  the  thing  general  is  public  divine  worship,  and  who 
shall  be  the  official  ministers  or  functionaries  of  that  worship.  A 
physical  disqualification  under  the  one  dispensation,  therefore, 
would,  it  seems  to  me,  be  equally  a  disqualification  under  the  other 
dispensation. 

But,  apart  from  what  the  word  of  God  may  thus  teach  upon  this 
subject,  the  duties  and  demands  of  the  ministerial  office  are  such 
that  the  successful  and  uninterrupted  prosecution  of  it  imperatively 
requires  (^t'^///j' soundness  and  vigor  of  a  high  order.  Meni  n  feeble 
health,  and  of  frail  physical  constitution,  like  Baxter  and  Dodd- 
ridge and  Summerfield,  have,  of  course,  been  eminently  useful  in 
the  work  of  the  ministry.  And  yet,  with  health  and  bodily  strength 
how  much  more  useful  they  would  have  been.  How  much  work 
for  Christ  and  souls,  because  of  their  limited  strength,  was  neces- 
sarily left  undone.  How  much,  for  the  same  reason,  was  feebly  and 
unsatisfactorily  done.  And  in  how  many  such  cases  of  feeble  health, 
when  the  Church  perhaps  expended  her  means  in  educating  the 
man  for  the  ministry,  and  when  he  has  perhaps  barely  entered  upon 
it,  he  soon  becomes  utterly  incapacitated,  is  compelled  to  relinquish 
his  work,  and  speedily  sinks  into  the  grave.  A  sound,  vigorous, 
healthful  body  is,  then,  an  essentially  important  natural  endowment 
which  all  who  seek  the  office  and  work  of  the  ministry  should 
possess. 

The  same  is  true,  even  in  a  higher  degree,  of  the  7ncn/a/  endow- 
ments and  capacities  of  those  seeking  this  sacred  office.  These 
should  always  be  of  an  high  order.  The  ministry  is  a  work  which 
requires,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  a  strong,  vigorous  mind.  It 
demands  a  high  order  of  native  intellect.  He  is  not  called  to  the 
ministry  whose  capacity  of  thought,  whose  original  endowments  of 
reason  and  understanding,  are  not  above  the  capacities  and  endow- 
ments with  which  men  generally  are  by  nature  gifted.  The  minis- 
ter is  to  be  the  student  and  interpreter  to  the  people  of  God's  word, 


478  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

he  is  to  be  the  leader  of  rehgious  thought,  he  is  to  originate  and 
mould  public  sentiment,  he  is  to  be  the  teacher  and  instructor  of 
society,  he  is  to  be  the  head  and  governor  of  the  church  of  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  shall  make  him  the  overseer.  Can  such  a  position 
be  properly  filled  by  a  man  of  ordinary  mental  power  ?  Does 
not  the  full  and  successful  discharge  of  such  high  duties  demand 
also  the  possession  of  a  high  order  of  talent?  Men  of  compara- 
tively feeble  natural  ability  have,  I  am  aware,  in  spite  of  their  feeble- 
ness, in  some  instances,  been  extensively  useful ;  but  even  these,  it 
must  be  admitted,  often  owe  their  usefulness  more  to  certain  favor- 
able surroundings  and  helps  than  to  their  own  personal  endeavors. 
Besides,  their  usefulness  is  generally  limited  to  certain  peculiar  local- 
ities, and  to  a  certain  class  of  minds  and  range  of  society  of  their 
own  level,  or  even  below  their  own  level,  but  ceases,  or  is  greatly 
diminished,  when  they  are  transferred  to  other  and  more  cultured 
and  thoughtful  communities.  And  yet  the  Saviour  bids  his  minis- 
try to  make  the  zuorld  their  field,  and  hence  requires  that  they 
should  be  fitted  also  to  labor  with  success  in  any  part  of  it. 

The  "call"  to  the  office  of  the  ministry  includes,  then,  suitable 
natural  endowments,  both  of  body  and  of  mind.  Completeness  and 
health  of  body;  vigor  and  strength  of  mind  ;  quickness  and  grasp  in 
apprehension;  soundness  of  judgment;  stability  in  purpose;  attract- 
iveness in  person;  affability  in  address  and  manner;  readiness  and 
force  in  utterance;  born  leadership  in  the  character  of  his  whole 
being,  both  of  body  and  mind — these  are  some  of  the  gifts  which 
God,  in  his  very  creation  already,  bestows  upon  the  man  whom  he 
calls  into  the  office  of  the  ministry. 

But,  beside  these  natural  endowments,  which  are  the  gifts  of  God 
by  creation,  there  are,  also,  conferred  upon  all  wl\om  he  calls  into 
the  ministerial  office,  the  additional  endozument,  secondly,  of  suitabLe 
education  and  training,  or  the  discipline  and  development,  by  culture, 
of  the  mental  capacities  bestozved  by  creation.  Natural  gifts  alone  are 
insufficient  to  meet  fully,  especially  in  this  our  day  and  land,  the 
demands  which  are  made  upon  the  ministry.  There  must  also  be 
the  additional  endowment  of  culture,  the  development,  the  training, 
the  discipline  of  the  mental  faculties  into  their  highest  possible 
measure  or  capacity  of  usefulness.  Scholarship  as  well  as  talent, 
education  as  well  as  genius,  attainments  as  well  as  endowments, 
are  required  by  all  who  would  be  workmen  in  the  office  of  the  min- 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  479 

istry,  not  needing  to  be  ashamed,  able  rightly  to  divide  the  word  of 
God.  This  has  always  been  so.  Moses,  although  naturally  pos- 
sessed of  the  highest  order  of  genius,  was  nevertheless  "  learned, 
also,  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians."  (Acts  vii.  22.)  The 
Apostles  were  during  three  years  under  the  personal  tuition  of  the 
Saviour  himself  before  they  were  sent  forth  upon  their  ministerial 
work.  Paul,  the  most  useful  of  the  Twelve,  was  also  the  best  edu- 
cated of  the  Twelve.  "A  well  educated  ministry  of  religion  has 
always  been  the  ordinance  of  heaven  from  the  earliest  records  of  his- 
tory to  the  present  hour.  The  educational  provisions  of  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  the  scribes  and  doctors  of  the  law 
among  the  Jews,  the  personal  training  which  Christ  gave  his  apostles, 
the  celebrated  schools  of  the  early  Church,  and  the  Universities  and 
Colleges  of  later  and  present  ages,  all  of  which  were  expressly 
founded  and  designed  for  the  suitable  education  of  ministers,  and 
often  in  the  face  of  almost  incredible  difficulties,  bear  a  most  remark- 
able and  unbroken  testimony  to  the  settled  judgment  of  the  Church 
on  this  point  in  all  its  dispensations."  {^Considerations  on  a  Call  to 
the  Ministry,  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  M.  B.  Hope,  Professor  in  the  College 
of  New  Jersey.)  There  have  of  course  been  some  uneducated  men 
who  have  yet  been  useful  men.  But  such  men  are  exceptions  to  the 
rule.  God  can,  we  admit,  make  an  illiterate  and  uneducated  man 
successful  in  the  preaching  of  the  word.  With  him  all  things  are 
possible.  Even  a  dumb  ass,  if  he  wills  it,  can  be  so  made  to  speak 
that  a  prophet  himself  sitting  upon  it  is  instructed  by  it.  But  that 
does  not  prove  that  he  wants  only  dumb  asses  to  be  his  ministers. 
He  may  sometimes,  for  special  reasons,  depart  from  his  general 
order  or  rule,  and  he  may  sometimes  make  ignorance  serve  his 
purpose;  but  if  he  does,  he  does  it  in  spite  of  the  ignorance,  and  by 
other  factors  beside  and  above  the  ignorance.  God  never  uses  igno- 
rance itself  as  an  element  of  ministerial  success.  God  calls  no  man 
into  the  ministry  because  he  is  uneducated  and  ignorant.  If  such  a 
man  does  find  his  way  into  the  ministry,  and  chances  to  be  useful, 
he  is  so  despite  his  lack  of  education  and  despite  his  ignorance,  and 
he  would,  under  the  same  circumstances,  if  he  were  not  ignorant, 
be  vastly  more  useful.  In  all  the  past  ages  of  the  Church  the  men 
who  have  risen  to  the  highest  measures  of  usefulness,  who  have 
impressed  themselves  upon  their  generations  for  good,  whose  influ- 
ence survived  them  and  moulded  the  thought  and  life  of  venerations 


480  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

following,  were  educated  men.  And,  if  in  any  age  in  the  world's 
history,  God  called  only  cultured  and  intelligent  men  into  the  office 
of  the  ministry,  he  does  so  now,  in  our  age.  Ours  is  an  age  of  more 
than  ordinary  intelligence  among  the  masses,  an  age  of  intense  men- 
tal activity,  an  age  of  inquiry  and  investigation,  an  age  of  skeptical 
assault  upon  the  very  foundations  of  Christianity,  an  age  in  which 
unsanctified  genius  and  scholarship  are  massed  in  deadly  hostility 
against  every  essential  doctrine  of  our  most  holy  faith.  At  such  a 
time  especially,  therefore,  is  a  talented  and  learned  ministry  an  ab- 
solute necessity.  Now,  when  liberty  all  over  our  land  is  tending  to 
licentiousness,  and  when  infidelity  and  every  possible  system  of  false 
religion  are  stalking  abroad  and  are  impudently  challenging  the 
credentials  and  faith  of  the  believer,  it  would  surely  be  more  than 
folly,  it  would  be  a  crime,  to  entrust  the  defence  and  propagation  of 
the  faith  to  any  other  class  of  men  than  men  of  clear,  strong,  well- 
trained,  and  well-furnished  minds.  Now  more  than  ever  the  Church 
demands  a  ministry  which  will  "  hold  fast  the  faithful  word,  and  be 
able  by  sound  doctrine  both  to  exhort  and  convince  the  gainsayers, 
for  there  are  many  unruly  and  vain  talkers  and  deceivers  whose 
mouths  must  be  stopped,  who  subvert  whole  houses,  teaching  things 
which  they  ought  not  for  filthy  lucre's  sake."  (Tit.  i.  9-1 1).  Now 
more  than  ever  God  calls  only  men  possessed  of  thorough  mental 
training  into  the  office  and  work  of  the  ministry.  The  "  rite  vo- 
caius''  never  did  include,  and  does  not  now  include,  the  factor  of 
ignorance. 

And  hence,  also,  our  Forniida  of  Government  and  Discipline  very 
properly  requires  of  all  candidates  for  the  ministry  that  their  "  ex- 
aminations shall  embrace  at  least  the  following  subjects,  viz.:  '  Per- 
sonal Piety,  and  the  motives  of  the  applicant  for  seeking  the  holy 
ofifice,  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  Scriptures,  the  Evidences  of  Christi- 
anity, Natural  and  Revealed  Theology,  Church  History,  Pastoral 
Theology,  the  Rules  of  Sermonizing,  and  Church  Government.'  " 
This  is  as  it  should  be.  So  much,  at  least,  should  in  every  case  be 
required.  It  is,  however,  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  this  require- 
ment of  our  ''  Formida"  moderate  as  it  is,  is  not  always  in  our 
Synods  enforced.  In  some  of  our  Synods  it  is  most  flagrantly  dis- 
regarded. Men  from  the  ministry  of  other  churches  in  which  theo- 
logical and  scientific  training  for  the  ministry  is  not  pretended,  are 
slipped  into  the  ranks  of  our  ministry  as  easily  and  quickly  as  though 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  48 1 

we  pretended  to  such  training  as  little  as  the  churches  from  which 
such  applicants  come.  And  men  from  the  membership  of  our  own 
Church,  with  scarcely  an  education  sufficient  to  secure  them  an  ap- 
pointment as  teachers  in  the  common  schools  of  our  land,  are  yet, 
by  the  solemn  "laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,"  received 
into  the  ministerial  office,  and  sent  forth  as  the  accredited  teachers 
of  the  Church  of  Christ.  Like  the  conies,  such  men,  send  them 
where  you  will,  are  "  a  feeble  folk."  They  are  not  called  of  God  to 
the  ministry.  They  cannot,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  wield  an  in- 
fluence such  as  the  ministry  should  command  for  good.  They  are 
objects  of  indifference  to  the  masses,  and  of  contempt  to  the  thought- 
ful and  intelligent,  wherever  they  go.  They  degrade,  in  public  esti- 
mation, the  ministerial  office;  they  weaken  the  influence  of  Christi- 
anity, whose  representatives  and  defenders  they  assume  to  be;  and 
they  prove  an  injury  and  not  a  blessing  to  the  church  wdiose  inter- 
ests they  have  thus  entrusted  to  them.  By  no  possible  stretch  of 
charity  can  we  believe  that  such  men  have  the  "'rite  vocatiis','  or  the 
true  call  from  God  to  enter  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  they  should 
never,  therefore,  be  admitted  into  it.  And  hence,  in  order  to  cor- 
rect this  evil,  our  General  Synod  owes  it  to  the  church  as  a  simple 
matter  of  self-protection,  and  owes  it  to  the  cause  of  Christ  as  a 
simple  matter  of  justice  and  of  right,  to  insist  upon  the  enforcement 
to  the  very  letter,  of  the  requirements,  in  this  respect,  of  her  own 
"  Foj'vutla,"  and  by  the  establishment  of  the  same  high  standard  of 
qualifications  for  admission  in  all  her  District  Synods,  and  the  es- 
tablishment of  better  inter-synodical  agreement  and  comity,  so  that 
whatever  will  exclude  a  man  from  admission  into  the  ministry  in 
one  of  our  Synods  will  equally  do  so  in  every  other,  make  it  abso- 
lutely impossible  for  men,  illiterate  and  unqualified,  to  receive  licen- 
sure or  ordination  at  her  hands. 

There  is,  however,  another  kind  of  training  for  the  ministry  be- 
side this  culture  of  the  mind  or  training  in  the  schools,  which  is  a 
very  important  qualification,  and  very  necessary  in  order  to  a  man's 
greatest  possible  influence.  I  refer  to  tlie  culture  of  personal  habits; 
the  training  which  will  give  to  a  man  the  ease  and  bearing  of  a 
thoroughly  refined  Christian  gentleman.  The  minister  is  capable,  if 
fitted  for  it,  to  wield  an  immense  social  influence  and  power.  He 
can,  by  his  taste  and  accomplishments,  by  his  ease  and  grace  in  so- 
ciety, by  his  attractive  air  and  manner,  by  the  winning  and  pleasing 


482  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

social  qualities  which  he  possesses,  make  himself  a  desirable  and 
ever-welcome  guest  in  every  home  in  the  community,  can  draw  all 
with  whom  he  thus  comes  in  contact  to  himself,  can  especially  win 
the  young  as  his  admirers  and  friends,  and  can  thus  gain  a  power 
for  good  which  will  be  almost  boundless.  For,  after  all,  as  minis- 
ters we  reach  men,  if  we  reach  them  at  all,  by  this  very  thing  of 
what  we  are  to  them  personally  and  in  the  plane  of  our  social  rela- 
tions to  them.  By  this  they  are  either  repelled  or  attracted.  By  this 
they  are  either  prepared  or  unprepared  to  be  benefited  by  our  public 
ministrations  to  them.  And  yet  how  many  ministers  there  are  whose 
training  for  their  position  is,  in  this  respect,  lamentably  defective. 
It  is  a  very  delicate  subject  upon  which  to  speak,  and  yet  it  may  as 
well  be  spoken;  but  are  there  not  men  in  the  ministry  of  every 
church,  possessed  of  fine  natural  ability,  of  able  scholarship,  and  of 
undoubted  piety,  who  nevertheless,  simply  because  of  their  lack  of 
social  culture,  their  uncouthness,  their  boorishness,  their  coarseness, 
their  lack  of  ease  and  grace  in  good  society,  their  destitution  of  the 
refinement  and  taste,  the  self-possession  and  unaffected  affability 
and  suavity,  which  always  characterize  a  man  as  a  gentleman,  cut 
themselves  off  from  the  influence  for  good  which  they  would  other- 
wise command,  and  fail  to  reach  and  win  for  Christ  many  whom 
otherwise  they  would  reach  and  win?  Looking  at  such  men,  the 
question  has  often  forced  itself  upon  my  mind :  Is  there  not 
something  defective  in  our  system  of  training  for  the  ministry 
which  neglects  a  factor  of  ministerial  usefulness  so  important? 
Do  we  not  in  our  Ministeriums,  when  men  present  themselves 
before  us  for  induction  into  the  sacred  office,  inquire  too  little 
into  their  fitness  for  the  work,  by  this  characteristic  of  their 
social  qualifications  ?  Are  such  men,  after  all,  really  called  of  God 
into  the  ministry  ?  Does  he  want  them  there?  Have  they,  indeed 
— ought  they  to  have — the  ''rite  vocaUdsf'  Moses  was  not  only  a 
man  of  great  learning,  but  he  was  a  man,  also,  of  courtly  and  re- 
fined manners.  Paul  constantly  reveals  himself  to  have  been  a 
thorough  and  elegant  gentleman.  Our  Saviour  must  have  been 
very  easy  and  winning  in  his  social  intercourse  and  relations,  else 
the  common  people  would  not,  as  they  did,  have  heard  him  gladly; 
else  the  multitude  would  not  have  gathered  so  eagerly  and  intimately 
around  him  on  every  possible  occasion,  else  he  would  not  have 
been  invited  to  dine,  as  he  often  was,  in  the  house   of  proud  Phari- 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY,  483 

sees  ;  else  he  would  never  have  been  the  frequent  and  most  welcome 
visitor  in  the  house  of  Martha  and  Mary  and  Lazarus  that  he  was. 
"  Be  courteous,"  is  a  scriptural  injunction  addressed  to  all  Chris- 
tians. Is  it  not  especially  addressed  to  ministers?  Can  we  be  as 
useful  as  the  office  of  the  ministry  demands  that  we  should  be,  with- 
out it?  Does  God  call  a  man  into  the  ministry  who  is  thus  socially 
unqualified  for  the  ministry  ?  These  questions  might,  with  profit, 
be  pondered  by  many. 

Aviong  the  gifts,  lioxvcvcr,  necessary  above  all  others  for  the  work, 
and  ivithout  ivJiicJi  God  calls  no  one  to  the  office  of  the  nn)dstry,  is  the 
gift  of  eminent  personal  piety. 

The  validity  of  ministerial  acts,  it  is  true,  does  not  depend  upon  the 
personal  or  subjective  moral  character  of  him  who  performs  the 
acts.  The  sacraments,  e.  g.,  have  in  themselves  an  inherent  or  ob- 
jective efficacy.  The  word  of  God  is  still  the  word  of  God,  even 
though  proclaimed  by  one  who  has  never  experienced  its  power  in 
his  own  heart.  "Although,"  says  our  Augsburg  Confession  (Art. 
VIII.),  "  the  Christian  Church  is  properly  nothing  else  than  the  con- 
gregation of  all  believers  and  saints,  yet,  as  in  this  life  there  are 
many  hypocrites  and  false  Christians,  open  sinners  remaining  even 
among  the  pious,  the  sacraments,  nevertheless,  are  effectual,  even  if 
the  preachers  by  whom  they  are  administered  be  not  pious,  as  Christ 
himself  says  (Matt,  xxiii.  2),  "  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sit  in 
Moses'  seat."  And  the  Apology  {De  Ecclesia,  Art.  VII.  et  VIII.) 
says  :  "  Nor  are  the  sacraments  without  efficacy  because  adminis- 
tered by  unworthy  and  ungodly  men ;  for  they  stand  before  us  by 
virtue  of  the  call  of  the  Church,  not  on  their  own  authority,  but  as 
representatives  of  Christ,  who  says  (Luke  x.  16):  'He  that  heareth 
you  heareth  me.'  Thus  Judas  was  also  sent  to  preach.  Now,  al- 
though ungodly  men  preach  and  administer  the  sacraments,  they 
officiate  in  Christ's  stead.  And  this  declaration  of  Christ  teaches 
us  that,  in  such  cases,  the  unworthiness  of  the  servant  should  not 
offend  us." 

And  yet,  whilst  all  that  the  Confessions  thus  teach  is  true,  and 
whilst  an  ungodly  man's  ministerial  acts  may,  notwithstanding  his 
personal  unworthiness,  result  in  some  measure  of  good  because  of 
what  the  word  and  sacraments  are  in  themselves,  nevertheless  it  is 
also  true  that  God  never  calls  ungodly  men  into  the  office  of  the 
ministry,  nor,  if  they  thrust  themselves  uncalled  into   it,   does   he 


484  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ever  crown  their  labors  with  great  or  extensive  spiritual  results. 
God  calls  no  one  into  the  ministry  whom  he  has  not  first  called  to 
be  a  Christian.  Have  whatever  else  he  may,  if  he  has  not  eminent 
personal  piety,  he  has  not  the  right  call  to  the  ministry.  "  God 
qualifies  men  for  the  office,"  says  Dr.  Wayland,  "by  making  them 
disciples  of  Christ,  his  renewed  and  obedient  children,  heirs  of  ever- 
lasting life.  We  can  never  suppose  that  God  would  employ  men 
who  are  his  enemies,  in  rebellion  against  him,  to  persuade  others  to 
be  reconciled  to  him  ;  that  is,  to  do  what  they  steadfastly  refuse  to 
do  themselves.  Unless  a  man  have  within  himself  the  evidence  that 
he  has  been  born  again,  he  has  no  right  to  enter  the  ministry.  And, 
on  the  other  hand,  unless  a  man  give  evidence,  by  a  Christian 
life,  that  he  is  in  heart  a  true  disciple  of  Christ,  no  body  of  be- 
lievers can  without  sin  call  him  to  the  ministry."  [Wayla7id,  The 
Ministry  of  the  Gospel,  pp.  27,  28).  "  The  first  evidence,"  says  an- 
other writer,  "of  a  call  to  this  high  and  holy  office,  is  genuine  piety. 
An  elevated  tone  of  piety,  experimental  and  practical,  consistent 
and  controlling,  active  and  glowing,  is  an  essential  requisite,  abso- 
lutely indispensable  to  the  faithful  discharge  of  its  appropriate  duties. 
All  the  directions  of  inspiration  enjoin  or  presuppose  a  pious  heart, 
renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  baptized  with  the  spirit  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  brought  completely  under  the  sanctifying  influences  of  divine 
truth.  To  the  minister  of  the  gospel  are  entrusted  most  momentous 
and  solemn  interests.     He  is  commissioned  to  make  known  to  men 

"  The  eternal  counsels,  in  his  Master's  name 
To  treat  with  them  of  everlasting  things, 
Of  life,  death,  bliss  and  woe." 

It  is  preposterous  to  expect  a  man  to  communicate,  expound, 
enforce  and  apply  the  truths  of  the  Bible,  who  has  never  felt  their 
power  in  his  own  heart,  who  neither  understands,  believes  nor  loves 
them.  How^  shall  he  testify  of  the  sufficiency  of  the  remedy  pro- 
posed in  the  Gospel,  unless  he  feel  his  own  spiritual  malady?  How 
shall  he  awaken  the  careless  sinner,  if  he  himself  is  lulled  into  secu- 
rity? How  shall  he  feed  the  flock  of  Christ,  purchased  with  his 
precious  blood,  who  has  no  interest  in  that  purchase?  How  can  he 
relieve  the  tempted,  sympathize  with  the  children  of  sorrow,  bind 
up  the  broken-hearted,  and  comfort  them  that  mourn,  who  has  no 
experimental  knowledge  and  no  spiritual  experience?     How  shall 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRV.  485 

he  who  has  never  realized,  and,  therefore,  never  felt,  the  pressure  of 
his  own  sins,  present  the  word  "  fitly  spoken"  to  distressed  and 
heavy-laden  souls?  How  can  he  ^ive  to  every  one  his  portion  in 
due  season?  How  can  he  guide  anxious  and  doubting  souls? 
How  can  he  show  to  the  weary  traveler  the  road  which  he  himself 
has  never  traveled?  The  men,  then,  who  fill  the  ministerial  office, 
must  be  men  of  eminent  piety;  men  of  burning  and  untiring  zeal;  men 
whose  hearts  glow  with  the  love  of  Christ;  men  full  of  faith  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost;  men  who  will  not  hesitate  to  do  anything  or  suffer 
anything  for  Christ;  men  who  will  forsake  even  the  comforts  of 
refined  society,  and  the  endearments  of  home,  and  with  their  lives 
in  their  hands,  go  forth  to  the  destitute  settlements  in  our  own 
country,  or  to  the  distant  heathen,  to  preach  the  glad  tidings  of 
redemption  to  perishing  sinners.  The  ministry  adapted  to  the  pres- 
ent state  of  the  Church  and  of  the  world,  must  be  characterized  by 
a  broken  spirit  before  God,  compassion  for  the  souls  of  others,  and 
an  unction  from  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  piety  needed  must  be  so 
consistent  and  controlling,  as  to  constantly  influence  the  feelings 
and  passions,  the  desires  and  volitions,  the  daily  habits  and  enter- 
prises of  the  individual.  It  must  be  so  elevated  and  deep-toned  as 
to  pervade  the  soul,  sweeten  the  temper,  and  lead  daily  to  the  faith- 
ful examination  of  the  heart  and  to  the  entire  consecration  of  the 
life  to  God."     {Ev.  Reviciv,  vol.  xii.,  pp.  199-200.) 

But,  to  sum  up,  and  to  show  you  in  the  clearest  and  fullest  light 
what  the  character  and  piety  are  of  a  man  fitted  for  the  ministerial 
office,  and  truly  called  of  God  into  it,  let  me  yet  quote  the  words  of 
an  old  author,  who  was  himself  the  highest  human  realization  of  a 
true  Gospel  minister  that  the  world  and  the  Church  have  ever  seen. 
He  writes  as  follows:  "This  is  a  true  saying,  if  a  man  desire  the 
offiice  of  a  bishop  (jT/wo-z/t)  he  desireth  a  good  work.  A  bishop, 
then,  must  be  blameless,  the  husband  of  one  wife,  vigilant,  sober,  of 
good  behavior,  given  to  hospitality,  apt  to  teach,  not  given  to  wine, 
no  striker,  not  greedy  of  filthy  lucre;  but  patient,  not  a  brawler, 
not  covetous,  not  a  novice,  lest  being  lifted  up  wnth  pride,  he  fall 
into  the  condemnation  of  the  devil.  Moreover  he  must  have  a  good 
report  of  them  which  are  without,  lest  he  fall  into  reproach  and  the 
snare  of  the  devil."  (i  Tim.  iii.  1-7).  And  let  me  also  yet,  in  order 
to  show  you  the  godly  spirit  in  which  this  grandest  of  human 
preachers  prosecuted  the  work  of  the  ministry,  read  you  a  quotation 
32 


486  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

from  a  farewell  discourse  which  he  delivered  when  he  resigned  the 
pastorship  of  the  Church  at  Ephesus.  "Ye  know,"  is  his  language, 
"  from  the  first  day  that  I  came  into  Asia,  after  what  manner  I  have 
been  with  you  at  all  seasons,  serving  the  Lord  with  all  humility  of 
mmd,  and  with  many  tears  and  temptations  which  befell  me  by  the 
lying  in  wait  of  the  Jews :  and  how  I  kept  back  nothing  that  was 
profitable  to  you,  but  have  showed  you  and  have  taught  you  pub- 
licly, and  from  house  to  house,  testifying  both  to  the  Jews  and  also 
to  the  Greeks,  repentance  toward  God  and  faith  toward  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  Wherefore  I  take  you  to  record  this  day  that  I  am 
pure  from  the  blood  of  all  men;  for  I  have  not  shunned  to  declare 
unto  you  all  the  counsel  of  God.     (Acts  xx.  18-27.) 

Such  now,  in  their  three-fold  character  of  natural  endowment,  of 
acquired  culture,  and  of  bestowed  Christian  character  and  grace,  are 
the  gifts  which,  according  to  God's  word,  and  as  taught  by  the 
experience  of  the  Church,  must  be  possessed,  and  always  are 
possessed,  by  those  who  are  the  called  of  God  to  the  office  of  the 
Gospel  Ministry.  The  ''rite  vocaivs"  of  our  Article  includes  them 
all,  and  he  who  has  not  these  "'gifts'  from  God  has  not  the  ''call' 
from  God. 

It  should  hardly  be  necessary  to  add,  and  yet  it  is,  that  the  sjih- 
jects  ox  persons  whom  God  thus,  by  the  bestowal  of  this  fitness  for 
its  duties,  calls  to  the  office  of  the  ministry  are  always  men  and  not 
women.  In  his  word  he  emphatically  forbids  women  to  speak  or 
preach  in  the  churches  of  the  saints.  "  Let  your  women  keep 
silence  in  the  churches,"  is  his  clear  and  unmistakable  command, 
"  for  it  is  not  permitted  unto  them  to  speak  ;  but  they  are  com- 
manded to  be  under  obedience,  as  also  saith  the  law.  And,  if  they 
will  learn  anything,  let  them  ask  their  husbands  at  home ;  for  it  is  a 
shame  for  a  woman  to  speak  in  the  church."  (i  Cor.  xiv.  34-35.) 
And  again  :  "  Let  the  women  learn  in  silence  with  all  subjection; 
but  I  suffer  not  a  woman  to  teach  nor  to  usurp  authority  over  the 
man,  but  to  be  in  silence  ;  for  Adam  was  first  formed,  then  Eve;  and 
Adam  was  not  deceived,  but  the  woman,  being  deceived,  was  in  the 
transgression."  (i  Tim.  ii.  11-14.)  Thus  does  God  in  his  word, 
plainly  and  positively,  forbid  women  to  preach.  Would  he  then 
now  "  cair'  them  to  what  he  has  thus  forbidden  them  to  do?  Be- 
sides, is  not  woman,  in  the  very  constitution  of  her  physical  being, 
and  especially  in  the  formation  of  her  vocal  organs  and  capacities, 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  487 

unfitted  for  the  work  of  preaching  the  word?  Are  not,  also,  the 
very  instincts  of  her  being,  the  innate  modesty,  the  retiring  diffi- 
dence of  the  nature  witli  which  God  has  endowed  her,  and  which 
constitute  both  her  charm  and  her  power,  all  of  which  she  must 
first  do  violence  to  before  she  can  bring  herself  into  willingness  to 
assume  a  work  so  public  and  conspicuous,  an  abiding  protest  against 
it  ?  Is  it  not  all,  as  Horace  Bushnell  well  styles  it,  "  a  reform  against 
nature?"  Is  it  not  all  in  direct  conflict  with  the  divine  purposes 
concerning  woman  as  revealed  in  the  Scriptures?  "  I  will  there- 
fore," saj's  God  in  his  word,  "that  the  younger  women  marry,  bear 
children,  guide  the  house,  give  none  occasion  to  the  adversary  to 
speak  reproachfully."  (i  Tim.  v.  14.)  Just  as  some  Christian  men, 
because  disqualified  and  incapable  rightly  to  discharge  its  duties, 
are  not  called  of  God  to  the  office  of  the  ministry,  so,  for  the  same 
reason,  together  with  the  additional  reason  that  God  wills  woman 
to  glorify  him  in  the  specific  domain  of  home,  no  woman  is  called 
to  the  office  of  the  ministry.  [Licthers  Works,  Erlangen  Ed.,  Vol. 
28,/.  SO.) 

2.  The  "  rite  vocatiis''  or  the  right  call  to  the  ministerial  office,  con- 
sists in  a  clear  and  heartfelt  conviction,  zvrojigJu  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  the  individual' s  oivn  conscionsness,  that  it  is  the  will  of  God  that  he 
should  enter  that  office  and  labor  in  it  for  the  divine  glory. 

I  purposely  here  make  use  of  the  word  "  co?iviction,"  meaning  by 
it  the  voice  of  conscience,  and  an  inner  and  imperative  sense  of  duty. 
■  A  mere  preference  of  the  office  and  work  of  the  ministry  to  any  other 
vocation  or  calling  in  life  ;  a  mere  consent,  under  the  persuasion  of 
friends,  or  because  of  the  force  of  favorable  circumstances,  to  enter 
it;  a  strong  desire  even,  considered  in  itself  alone,  to  fill  that  sacred 
position;  all  these  are  not  sufficient  evidences  in  themselves  of  a 
divine  call.  All  these  may  exist,  and  the  man  still  not  be  rightly 
called.  The  right  inner  call  is  something  very  different.  It  is  more 
than  mere  willingness,  or  preference,  or  desire,  or  strong  inner  im- 
pulse. It  springs  purely  from  the  domain  of  conscience.  It  comes 
witfc  the  force  and  dignity  of  an  ethical  imperative  ;  a  supreme  moral 
obligation;  an  overwhelming  and  ineradicable  sense  of  duty ;  all 
that,  in  its  deepest  and  fullest  sense,  is  expressed  by  the  word  ought. 
Many  falsely  regard  themselves  as  possessing  the  divine  call  simply 
because  Xhay  feel  moved  to  become  ministers,  without  for  a  moment 
inquiring   into  the  origin  or  moral  character  of  their  feelings.     The 


488  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

mere  fact  that  they  have,  no  matter  to  them  how  it  has  been  awak- 
ened, a  desire  to  preach,  is  to  them  proof  abundant  that  they  are  also 
called  of  God  to  do  so.  This  desire,  they  assume,  could  have  been 
awakened  in  them  by  the  Holy  Ghost  only,  and  can  be  nothing  less 
than  the  voice  of  the  Holy  Ghost  saying  to  them  that  they  are 
chosen  of  God  to  the  work.  As  was  noticed  in  the  early  part  of 
our  lecture,  this  was  the  notion  concerning  the  call  to  the  ministry 
which  was  held  by  the  Anabaptists  and  by  other  fanatics  in  the  days 
of  the  Reformation.  It  was  the  theory  also  of  the  entire  School  of 
Mystics.  It  is  the  theory  which  is  now  held  by  the  Friends  or 
Quakers.  And  it  is  the  theory  also  upon  which  in  all  our  different 
Protestant  churches  we  too  much  proceed  in  determining  the  ques- 
tion whether  or  not  a  man  is  divinely  called  to  the  ministerial  office. 
"  Do  you  feel  yourself  called  to  preach  the  Gospel  "  is  by  many 
made  the  chief  or  decisive  question,  and  if  the  candidate  declares 
that  he  does  thus  feel,  the  matter  is  already  largely  settled.  The 
candidate's  own  subjective  impressions  concerning  himself  are  re- 
garded as  a  kind  of  holy  of  holies,  into  which  it  would  be  irreverent 
or  possibly  criminal  for  any  with  doubts  and  questionings  to  enter. 
And  many  a  young  man  decides  to  study  for  the  ministry,  and  edu- 
cation societies  decide  to  support  him,  and  theological  seminaries 
decide  to  receive  him,  and  Synods  decide  to  license  or  ordain  him, 
and  churches  decide  to  elect  himi,  not  primarily,  as  they  all  should, 
because  he  possesses  such  scripturally  defined  ministerial  gifts  and 
graces  as  indicate  the  will  of  God  in  the  case,  but  largely,  if  not  ' 
sometimes  altogether,  simply  because  he  declares  that  he  feels  him- 
self inwardly  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  enter  the  ministry. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  all  this  is  very  wrong.  This 
exaltation  of  a  mere  subjective  impression,  or  a  mere  desire,  into  an 
unquestionable  and  infallible  oracle  or  expression  of  the  divine  will, 
has  put  many  a  man  into  the  office  of  the  ministry  whom  God  did 
not  call  there,  and  whose  induction  into  it  resulted  unhappily  to 
himself  and  injuriously  to  the  Church. 

The  mere  desire  to  become  a  minister  is  in  itself  no  proof  ctf  a 
divine  call.  That  desire  may  be  born  of  ignorance,  or  of  vanity,  or 
of  ambition,  or  of  indolence  and  love  of  ease,  or  of  mere  morbid 
excitement,  or  of  regard  to  the  wishes  of  others.  It  may  spring 
from  a  thousand  unsanctified  and  selfish  sources.  There  may  not 
be  a  single  divine  influence  or  factor  of  grace  in  it.     In  proof  of  this 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  489 

how  frequently  is  it  not  the  case,  and  especially  in  times  of  religious 
awakenings,  that  young  men  feel  inwardly  moved  or  "called"  to  seek 
the  office  of  the  ministry,  who  most  clearly  hav^e  no  fitness  whatever 
for  it,  and  who  in  a  comparatively  brief  time  not  only  lose  the  desire 
which  they  had  for  the  ministry,  but  lose  often  their  very  profession 
of  piety,  and  again  go  back  into  the  world  and  into  sin.  How 
many,  also,  are  there  not  to-day  in  the  office  who,  by  their  ineffi- 
ciency and  perpetual  lack  of  success,  show  beyond  a  doubt,  no  matter 
how  strong  may  have  been  their  feeling  or  desire  for  it,  that  that 
feeling  or  desire  was  not  wrought  in  them  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
that  they  ran  without  having  been  divinely  called  or  sent.  On  the 
other  hand,  also,  how  often  is  it  not  the  case  that  those  who  are  evi- 
dently most  fitted  for  the  ministry,  and  who  are  most  clearly  called 
of  God  into  it,  have  yet  but  little  or  no  desire  to  enter  it,  and  who 
if  they  do  enter  it,  do  so  at  a  sacrifice  of  their  own  personal  predi- 
lections or  preferences,  and  only  from  a  deep-seated  and  solemn 
sense  of  obligation  or  duty.  They  are  men  in  whose  eyes  the  min- 
istry is  an  office  of  the  highest  possible  sanctity  and  responsibility, 
and  for  the  right  discharge  of  whose  duties  they  feel  themselves 
both  utterly  unworthy  and  incapable.  And  hence,  as  the  will  of 
God  is  more  and  more  clearly  revealed  to  them,  and  the  conviction 
grows  upon  them  that  they  are  indeed  divinely  called  to  be  ambas- 
sadors for'Christ,  there  is  within  them  an  instinctive  moral  shrinking 
back  from  it,  a  pleading  with  God  to  be  exempted  from  the  assump- 
tion of  such  mighty  responsibilities,  and  an  asking  tremblingly: 
"Lord,  who  am  I  that  thou  shouldst  send  me?"  Thus  Moses,  and 
Jonah,  and  Jeremiah,  were  all  without  an  "  inner  call"  to  their  work. 
in  the  sense  of  a  burning  and  irrepressible  desire  for  it,  and  each  of 
them  assumed  it  only  because  God  made  it  clear  to  their  under- 
standing and  conscience  that  it  was  their  duty  to  assume  it.  Neither 
of  them  zvanted  to  be  a  minister  of  God.  If  left  to  their  own  per- 
sonal preference  and  choice,  not  one  of  them  would  have  been  what 
they  were  called  of  God  to  be.  "  Oh,  my  Lord,"  was  the  plea  of 
Moses,  "  I  am  not  eloquent,  neither  heretofore  nor  since  thou  hast 
spoken  to  thy  servant,  but  I  am  slow  ot  speech  and  of  a  slow 
tongue."  (Exodus  iv.  lO.)  "  Ah,  Lord  God,"  cried  Jerem.iah,  when 
the  Lord  came  to  him  calling  him  to  his  prophetic  work,  "behold  I 
cannot  speak,  for  I  am  a  child."  (Jcr.  i.  6.)  And  when  the  "  word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  Jonah,  the  son  of  Amittai,  saying:   Arise,  go 


490  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  Nineveh,  that  great  city,  and  cry  against  it,  for  their  wickedness 
is  come  up  before  me,"  Jonah,  instead  of  desiring  the  work  thus  di- 
vinely assigned  him,  "  rose  up  to  flee  to  Tarshish  from  the  presence 
of  the  Lord,  and  went  down  to  Joppa,  and  he  found  a  ship  going  to 
Tarshish,  so  he  paid  the  fare  thereof  and  went  down  into  it  to  go 
with  them  unto  Tarshish  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord."  (Jonah 
i.  1-3.)  Or  as  Bishop  Simpson,  in  his  Yale  Lectures,  correctly  says: 
"There  is  not  an  instance  in  the  Holy  Writ  where  a  true  man  was 
ever  anxious  to  bear  the  divine  message.  He  always  shrank  from 
it,  hesitated,  and  trembled." 

The  existence,  therefore,  of  a  desire  for  the  office  of  the  ministry, 
even  in  a  strong  degree,  is,  in  itself,  no  conclusive  proof  of  a  divine 
call.  Such  desire  may  exist  where  God  has  not  spoken.  Satan 
himself  may,  indeed,  be  its  author ;  even  as  St.  Paul  teaches,  when 
he  says  :  "  For  such  are  false  apostles,  deceitful  workers,  transform- 
ing themselves  into  the  apostles  of  Christ.  And  no  marvel,  for 
Satan  himself  is  transformed  into  an  angel  of  light.  Therefore  it  is 
no  great  thing  if  his  ministers  also  be  transformed  as  the  ministers 
of  righteousness,  whose  end  shall  be  according  to  their  works." 
(2  Cor.  xi.  13-15.)  And  how,  it  might  here  pertinently  be  asked, 
could  Satan  use  a  man  to  greater  advantage  in  hindering  and  injur- 
ing the  Church  and  cause  of  Christ  than  simply  by  calling  him,  if 
bad,  or  even  only  weak  and  unqualified,  into  the  responsible  office 
of  the  ministry?  How  intensified,  when  once  in  the  ministry,  his 
influence  for  harm  and  evil ! 

This  inner  call  of  God,  the  subjective  impression  made  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  "  rite  vocatiis  "  from  above,  and  not  from  beneath, 
is  not,  then,  a  mere  sentiment  or  emotion,  no  mere  desire  or  im- 
pulse, no  mere  preference  or  persuasion,  but  it  is  a  calm,  rational 
conviction  of  duty.  It  grounds  itself  in  the  personal  conscience.  It. 
is  begotten  by  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  sacred  retreat  of  the  indivi- 
dual consciousness.  It  is  the  deep-seated  sense  of  the  soul  that  it  is 
the  will  of  God  that  it  should  seek  to  enter  the  office.  It  is  wholly 
what  God  wills  in  the  matter,  and  not  what  the  man  himself  wills. 
It  is,  in  a  word,  the  conviction,  rising  up  in  his  consciousness  into 
certainty,  that  God  has  qualified,  or  will  qualify,  him  for  the  work 
of  preaching  the  Gospel,  and  calls  him  to  it ;  and  that,  no  matter 
what  Jiis  choice  of  a  life-work  might  have  been,  God's  choice  for 
him   is  the  ministry,  and  that  only   at  the  very  peril  of  his  soul's 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  49 1 

salvation  can  he  decline  to  do  what  God  thus  bids  him  do.  At  first, 
indeed,  this  conviction  may  be  very  faint.  He  comes  probably  into 
this  consciousness  of  what  is  his  duty  gradually.  As  he  contem- 
plates the  perishing  condition  of  the  world,  as  he  prays  from  day  to 
day  "Thy  kingdom  come,"  as  he  reads  more  and  understands  better 
the  word  of  God,  as  he  learns  better  what  are  the  scriptural  qualifi- 
cations necessary  for  the  ministry,  as  he  studies  and  knows  himself 
more  and  finds  that  God  has  conferred  these  needed  gifts  even  upon 
him,  as  he  has  suggested  to  him  by  others  the  thought  that  possibly 
God  desires  him  in  the  ministry,  as  he  grows  in  strength  of  Chris- 
tian character  and  in  willingness  in  any  and  every  way  possible  to 
glorify  God,  and  especially  as  he  submits  himself  more  and  more  to 
be  guided  and  used  by  God  in  whatever  service  he  may  choose  for 
him,  and  prays  to  have  in  all  things  no  will  but  God's  will — as  he 
does  all  this,  the  conviction  that  he  is  called  of  God  to  the  office  of 
the  ministry  dawns  upon  him,  grows  on  him,  expands  gradually 
into  greater  clearness  and  positiveness,  settles  down,  at  last,  upon 
his  conscience  as  a  sure  call  from  God,  and  causes  him,  in  the  spirit 
of  loving  obedience  and  of  filial  subjection,  to  say  as  said  Isaiah  the 
prophet,  "Here  am  I,  send  me,"  (Isaiah  vi.  8.)  or  as  said  Paul  the 
apostle,  "Necessity  is  laid  upon  me,  yea,  woe  is  unto  me  if  I  preach 
not  the  Gospel."     (i  Cor.  ix.  16.) 

And  thus  is  there  in  every  true  call  to  the  ministry,  not  as  con- 
.stituting  in  itself  the  call,  but  simply  as  a  precursor  or  concomitant 
of  it,  and  moral  means  of  preparation  for  it,  this  conviction  in  the 
subject  himself  that  he  is  called  of  God  to  the  work.  This  it  is  that 
moves  him  humbly  to  present  himself  to  the  church,  whose  is  the 
power  of  the  keys,  for  her  judgment  in  his  case,  and  to  receive  at 
her  hands  the  outward  or  true  call.  And  hence  in  the  Episcopal 
church,  in  the  ordination  of  deacons,  the  bishop  demands  of  the 
candidate,  ''Do  you  trust  that  you  are  imvardly  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  take  upoji  you  this  office  and  ministry,  to  seme  God  for  the 
promotion  of  his  glory  and  the- edifying  of  his  people?"  And  the 
candidate  must  answer,  "/ //-//.y/ .y^."  In  the  ordination  service  of 
our  own  church,  the  candidate  is  asked,  " Z>c^  jc'w  believe  that  in 
seeking  the  mitiisterial  office,  you  are  influenced  by  a  sincere  love  to 
God,  your  Saviour,  and  desire  to  promote  his  glory!'  {I'ormula, 
chap,  xi.x.,  sec.  2,  4.) 

In  harmony,  also,  with  all  this  are  the  views  of  our  great  Lutheran 


492  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

dogmaticians.  For  whilst  they  are  always  most  emphatic  in  their 
condemnation  of  an  "  inner  call,"  in  the  fanatical  and  unscriptural 
sense  in  which  it  was  held  by  the  Anabaptists,  Schwenkfeldians, 
Weigelians,  Quakers,  and  others,  denying  the  need  of  any  outward 
call  by  the  word  and  the  church,  and  making  this  subjective  im- 
pulse in  itself  the  supreme  and  only  necessary  call,  they  neverthe- 
less admit  and  clearly  teach  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  an  inner 
inspiration  or  divinely  wrought  impression,  in  the  consciousness  of 
those  whom  God  has  gifted  or  qualified  for  the  ministerial  office, 
moving  them  to  seek  entrance  into  it,  and  causing  them  to  feel  that 
by  laboring  faithfully  in  it  they  will  be  able  to  do  most  for  his  glory. 

Gerhard,  e.  g.,  {De  Min.  Ecc,  sec.  75)  says: 

"We  grant  that  God,  by  an  inner  impulse  and  inspiration, 
breathes  into  some  this  disposition  to  undertake  the  ministry  of  the 
church,  without  regard  to  dangers  or  difficulties;  to  which  belongs, 
also,  that  mysterious  impulse  by  which  some  are  drawn  to  the 
study  of  theology.  We  also  grant  that  it  is  absolutely  required  of 
the  minister  that  he  be  not  allured  either  by  ambition,  or  avarice,  or 
any  other  wicked  desire,  but  that  induced  by  the  pure  love  of  God, 
and  the  desire  of  edifying  the  church,  he  should  accept  the  ecclesi- 
astical office  offered  him;  and  if  any  one  desire  to  apply,  in  a  proper 
sense,  the  name  of  secret  call  to  these  dispositions,  both  of  which 
are  especially  worthy  of  praise,  we  do  not  greatly  object.  Yet,  in 
the  mean  time,  we  give  the  warning  that,  in  order  that  the  doors  be 
not  opened  to  the  disturbances  of  the  Anabaptists,  or  the  revela- 
tions of  the  enthusiasts,  no  one,  by  reason  of  this  secret  call,  ought 
to  take  upon  himself  the  duties  of  the  ministerial  office,  unless  there 
be  added  to  it  the  outward  and  solemn  call  of  the  church." 

Chemnitz  (iii.  p.  119)  on  i  Tim.  iii.  i,  says: 

"To  desire  the  office  of  a  bishop  is  not  without  a  lawful  call  to 
take  upon  yourself  ministerial  functions;  but  he  who  understands 
the  foundations  of  heavenly  doctrine,  and  is  to  a  certain  extent 
endowed  with  the  gift  of  teaching,  in  offering  his  labor  to  God  and 
the  church,  by  this  very  act  seeks  for  nothing  else  than  that  God 
by  a  lawful  call  may  declare  whether,  when,  and  where  he  wishes 
to  use  his  ministry  in  the  Church.  And  such  a  one  ought  to  be 
endowed  with  such  a  mind  that,  if  a  lawful  call  should  not  follow 
this  petition,  he  would  not  take  it  upon  himself,  but  would  say 
with   David  (2  Sam.  ii.  26),  '  But,  if  he  thus  say,  I  have  no  delight 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  493 

in  thee,  behold  here  am  I,  let  him  do  to  me  as  seemeth  good  unto 
him.'" 

In  the  "  rite  vocatiis,"  or  the  regular  call  to  the  ministerial  office, 
as  demanded  by  this  Fourteenth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, there  is,  then,  a  subjective  impression  or  inner  conviction, 
wrought  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  conscience  of  the  individual, 
moving  him  to  seek  the  office  and  anointing  him,  as  it  were,  be- 
forehand with  spiritual  fitness  for  it,  but  which  nevertheless  is  not 
in  itself  the  call,  and  is  not  his  true  and  final  divine  commission  to 
preach  the  word  and  to  administer  the  sacraments,  or  to  assume 
and  discharge  the  duties  of  the  ministerial  office.  That  true  divine 
call  is  given,  not  thus  directly  and  immediately,  but  indirectly  and 
mediately,  through  the  Church  to  which  Christ  has  delegated  his 
power.     Hence : 

3.  The  "  rite  vocatiis,"  or  the  right  call  to  the  ministerial  office,  in  its 
essential  and  highest  form  of  expression,  consists  in  the  official  recog- 
nition by  the  Church,  in  her  exercise  of  the  poiver  of  the  keys,  of  the 
possession  on  the  part  of  the  person  seeking  the  office,  of  those  special 
gifts  and  graces  required  in  the  tvord  of  God  as  qualifications  for  the 
office  of  the  ministry,  and  the  public  and  solemn  induction  of  him  by 
the  rite  of  ordination,  because  of  his  possession  of  such  special  gifts 
arid  graces,  into  the  ministerial  office. 

In  Article  VII.  of  our  Confession  the  Church  is  defined  to  be  "the 
congregation  of  all  believers  among  whom  the  Gospel  is  preached 
in  its  purity  and  the  Holy  sacraments  are  administered  according  to 
the  Gospel."     (See  also  Apology  VII.) 

To  the  Church  thus  defined  belongs  the  right  of  calling  into  the 
ministerial  office.  This  right  to  "  call  "  is  hers,  because  to  her  has 
been  committed  by  the  Saviour  the  "  Power  of  the  Keys"  [Potestas 
Clavium).  "And  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in 
heaven,  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in 
heaven."  (Matt.  xvi.  19).  "Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit  they  are  re- 
mitted unto  them,  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain  they  are  retained." 
(John  XX.  23.) 

What  this  "power  of  the  keys"  is,  we  find  admirably  explained 
in  our  Confessions.  The  Augsburg  Confession  (Art.  XXVTII.,  Of 
the  Power  of  the  Bishops  or  Clergy),  says:  "  Accordingl)'  they  teach 
that  the  power  of  the  keys  or  the  bishops,  according  to  the  gospel, 


494  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

is  a  power  and  commission  from  God  to  preach  the  gospel,  to  remit 
and  to  retain  sins,  and  to  attend  to  and  administer  the  sacraments. 
For  Christ  sent  forth  the  Apostles  with  the  command:  '  As  my 
Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto  them  ; 
and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained.'  This  power  of 
the  keys,  or  of  the  bishops,  is  to  be  exercised  and  carried  into  effect 
alone  by  the  doctrine  and  the  preaching  of  the  word  of  God,  and  by 
the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  to  many  or  to  a  few  persons, 
according  to  the  call.  For  by  this  means  are  conferred,  not  tem- 
poral, but  eternal  blessings  and  treasures;  as  eternal  righteousness, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  eternal  life.  These  blessings  cannot  be  ob- 
tained otherwise  than  by  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  by  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  holy  sacraments." 

The  Apo/ogy,  also  (XIV.,  0/  the  Pozver  of  the  Church),  says: 
"  But  we  are  speaking  of  true  Christian  bishops;  and  we  are  pleased 
with  the  old  division,  namely,  that  the  power  of  the  bishops  consists 
m  potestate  Ordiiiis  di^d  posicstate  Jii7'isdictionis,  i.  e.,  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments,  and  in  spiritual  jurisdiction." 

Now,  this  "  power  of  the  keys,"'  the  Saviour,  as  head  of  the 
Church,  has  given  not  as  the  Romish  doctrine  upon  this  point 
claims,  to  the  popes  nor  to  the  bishops,  as  a  separate  and  superior 
order,  but  to  the  CJinrcJi,  as  the  whole  congregation  or  body  of 
Christian  believers.  As  is  also  declared  in  the  Appendix  to  the 
Smalcald  Articles :  "  To  this  point  the  declarations  of  Christ  pertain, 
which  show  that  the  keys  are  given  to  the  whole  Church,  and  not 
simply  to  some  particular  persons ;  as  the  text  says,  "  Where  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of 
them."  (Matt,  xviii.  20.)  And  as  Gerhard  also  {De  Min.  Ecc,  d>j), 
writes:  "Cuicunque  claves  regni  coelorum  ab  ipso  Christo  sunt  tra- 
ditae,  penes  eum  est  jus  vocandi  ecclesiae  ministros.  Atque  toti  ec- 
clesise  traditae  sunt  a  Christo  claves  regni  ccelorum.  Ergo  penes 
totam  ecclesiam  est  jus  vocandi  ministros." 

In  what  sense,  however,  precisely,  the  Saviour  has  thus  given  the 
keys  to  the  whole  Church,  whether  immediately  or  mediately, 
whether  he  has  given  them  to  her  as  a  pure  democracy,  having  in 
herself,  in  her  collective  capacity  and  directly,  the  authority  to  exer- 
cise their  power,  or  whether  he  has  done  so  only  mediately,  through 
the  ministry,  which  as  his  ambassadors  he  has  placed  in  the  Church  to 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  495 

act  as  part  of  her  and  for  her,  and  yet  in  his  name  as  King  and  Head 
to  be  spiritually  over  her — ail  this  has  long  been  a  subject  of  dispute. 
Sonic,  as  is  well  known,  take  the  position,  and  we  think  correctly, 
that  "the  church  or  congregation  has  the  keys,  not  immediately , hut 
mediately,  in  the  word  of  God  and  in  the  holy  office  of  tlie  minis- 
try." Thus  Grabau  and  many  others  bearing  the  Lutheran  name, 
and  devoted  to  the  Lutheran  polity  and  doctrine  in  their  most  con- 
servative and  churchly  aspect,  earnestly  maintain.  "  If  it  now  be 
said,"  writes  Grabau  (quoted  by  Dr.  C.  A.  Hay,  in  Evangelical  Re- 
view,Yo\.  XXL,  p.  617),  "that  this  special  ecclesiastical  authority  is 
given  by  Christ  to  his  Clinrch  upon  earth,  nothing  more  is  intended 
than  that  it  was  instituted  in  the  gospel  and  set  up  in  the  Church  by 
ordinary  means  through  the  efficacy  of  the  gospel  in  the  form  of 
the  office  of  bishop  or  preacher T  And  again  :  "  In  this  house  of  God 
now  there  are  the  keys  of  Christ  through  means  of  the  gospel  and 
the  office  of  the  ministry,  not  because  they  have  their  origin  there, 
but  because  that  is  the  appropriate  spiritual  theatre  where  they  can 
exhibit  their  power  for  the  consolation  and  salvation  of  souls,  and 
be  thus  put  to  use.  And  in  this  sense  the  Smalcald  Articles  say  that 
the  keys  are  given  to  the  whole  Church." 

But,  admitting  that  the  power  of  the  keys,  whether  mediately  or 
immediately,  has  been  given  by  Christ  to  the  Chnrch,  three  ques- 
tions may  now  be  pertinently  asked,  each  of  which,  if  correctly 
answered,  will  help  us  into  a  clearer  and  better  apprehension  of  our 
subject,  viz. : 

When,  or  in  what  act,  does  the  Church  lawfully  exercise  this  her 
jus  vocandi,  or  right  of  calling? 

Through  whom  does  she  lawfully  and  properly  perform  this  act? 

And  what  is  the  precise  import  or  character  of  the  act  which  she 
thus  performs  ? 

First.  When,  or  in  ivhat  act,  does  the  Church  laxvfully  exercise  this, 
her  JUS  vocandi,  or  right  of  calling  ? 

Does  she  do  it  in  the  election  of  a  man  as  its  pastor  by  a  single 
congregation  before  his  ordination,  or  does  she  do  it  in  the  act  of 
his  ordination  before  his  election?  Does  the  election  precede  the 
ordination,  or  does  the  ordination  properly  precede  the  election?  Is 
he  elected  because  he  has  been  ordained,  or  is  he  first  ordained  in 
order  that  he  may  subsequently  be  properly  elected?  In  a  word, 
does  the  act  of  the  separate  congregation  in  choosing  him  to  be  its 


49^  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

pastor  place  him  in  the  ministerial  office,  or  does  the  ordination  by 
the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery  or  Ministerium  place 
him  there?  Is  the  voice  of  the  Church,  in  other  words,  heard  in  the 
voice  of  the  congregation,  or  in  the  voice  of  the  Synod  or  Minis- 
terium, representing  many  congregations,  and  expressing  the  more 
general  opinion  or  judgment  of  the  Church  in  the  matter? 

It  is  well  known  that  Luther  held  to  the  view  that  election,  and 
not  ordination,  constituted  the  true  outward  or  mediate  call  of  the 
Church  into  the  office  of  the  ministry.  He  taught  that  whenever 
and  wherever  a  congregation  of  believers,  whether  their  number 
be  large  or  small,  are  associated  together  in  the  use  of  the  word 
and  sacraments,  and  choose  or  elect  one  to  preach  to  them  that 
word  and  administer  to  them  the  sacraments,  the  one  thus  elected 
is  by  that  act  of  election  made  a  minister,  or  truly  and  really  placed 
in  the  ministerial  office,  and  is  thus  as  truly  in  the  office  as  though 
he  had  been  ordained  by  the  hands  of  bishops.  The  election  is  the 
"call,"  and  the  ordination  is  merely  the  subsequent  declaration  or 
recognition  of  the  fact  that  there  has  been  such  a  "call."  {Vide 
Liitlier's  Letter  to  the  Senate  and  People  of  Prague,  in  iS2j.) 

The  Appendix  to  the  Smalcald  Articles  also  expresses  this  view. 
"  The  common  usages  of  the  Church,"  it  declares,  "  likewise  prove 
this :  for  in  former  times  the  people  elected  clergymen  and  bishops; 
then  the  bishops  living  in  or  near  the  same  place,  came  and  con- 
firmed those  elected  by  the  laying  on  of  hands ;  and  at  that  time 
ordination  was  nothing  else  than  this  approbation."  {Book  of  Con- 
cord, Eng.  trans.,  p.  401,  Also  Dr.  Walthers  "  Kirche  und  Anipt," 
pp.  248-255.) 

But,  however  much  we  all  revere  the  name  of  Luther,  and  incline 
to  yield  our  judgment  to  his,  this  view  which  he  thus  held  that  in 
the  congregation  itself  was  divinely  vested  they//.y  vocandi,  and  that 
an  election  of  a  man  as  its  pastor  by  a  congregation,  constituted  a 
rite  vocatus  and  placed  such  an  one  legitimately  in  the  office  of  the 
ministry,  does  not  at  all  commend  itself  to  us.  It  is,  we  modestly 
dare  to  assert,  in  its  entire  conception,  essentially  wrong,  and,  if 
practically  carried  out,  would  necessarily  lead  to  disastrous  results. 

It  assumes,  first  of  all,  that  an  individual  congregation,  though  it 
consists  of  but  two  or  three  persons,  is  the  Church.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  Church  is  "  the  congregation  o^  all  believers  among  whom 
the  Gospel  is  preached  in  its  purity  and  the  Holy  Sacraments  are 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MLNISTRY.  497 

administered  according  to  the  Gospel."  {Aj/g.  Con.,  Art.  VII.) 
"The  Church,"  says  Schmid,  "  is  the  Kingdom  in  which  Christ  ex- 
ercises his  dominion;  and  hence  many  dogmaticians  append  the 
doctrine  concerning  the  Churcli  to  that  concerning  Christ  as  the 
sovereign  in  his  empire."  [Doctrinal  Tlicology,  p.  602.)  "The  inner 
and  essential  form  of  the  Church,"  says  Hollazius,  "consists  in  the 
spiritual  union  of  true  believers  and  saints  who,  as  members  of  the 
Church,  are  bound  together  with  Christ  the  Head,  through  true  and 
living  faith,  which  is  followed  by  a  communion  of  mutual  love." 
The  individual  congregation,  therefore,  having  the  pure  word  and 
sacraments,  is  part  of  the  true  Church,  and  there  the  Church  truly 
is,  but  it  is  not  in  itself  thus  alone  the  Church.  A  part  is  never  the 
whole,  and  should  never  be  regarded  as  the  whole. 

Again :  this  view  is  based  upon  extravagant  notions  of  the  rights 
and  powers  in  the  case  of  an  individual  congregation.  Being  but 
part  of  the  whole,  it  cannot  rightfully  do  anything  which  affects  the 
whole,  without  the  consent  and  co-operation  of  the  whole.  "  The 
individual  congregation,"  says  Prof  Worley,  "while  it  has  for  itself 
all  the  rights  and  immunities  of  the  Church,  is  not  the  Church,  and 
has  no  authority  to  act  for  other  congregations  or  for  the  Church 
in  general.  Congregations  sustain  to  the  Church  universal  about 
the  same  relations  which  individual  members  do  to  the  congrega- 
tion. No  individual  Christian  in  the  exercise  of  his  scriptual  rights 
in  the  congregation  can  act  for  others,  or  by  his  own  will  can  de- 
termine and  act  for  the  congregation  ;  yet  he  enjoys  for  himself  all 
the  rights  and  privileges  which  pertain  to  the  congregation.  And 
so  while  a  congregation  may  enjoy  and  claim  for  itself,  and  even 
under  particular  circumstances  perform  for  itself,  all  which  apper- 
tains to  the  Church  at  large,  no  congregation  can  dictate  or  legislate 
or  perform  any  function  pertaining  to  the  Church  at  large,  for  other 
congregations  or  for  the  whole  Church.  All  those  offices  of  a 
general  nature,  which  have  regard  to  promoting  and  securing  the 
welfare  and  upbuilding  of  the  whole  Church,  are  of  this  nature,  and 
can  only  be  properly  performed  by  the  Church  in  her  representa- 
tive capacity,  an  essential  and  the  only  steadfast  element  of  which  is 
the  holy  ministry."      {Evangelical  Rcviczv,  Vol.  XV.,  pp.  317,  318.) 

Again  :  this  theory  that  the  right  to  call  is  vested  in  the  indivi- 
dual congregation,  and  that  the  election  of  a  man  to  be  pastor  of 
such  congregation,  is  the  true  call  of  the  Church  and  puts  him  into 


498  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  ministerial  office,  assumes  that  the  Church,  in  the  true  order  of 
events,  precedes  the  ministry,  and  creates  or  calls  the  ministry  into 
existence  only  as  she  herself  has  need  of  a  ministry.  But  it  seems 
to  us  clear,  beyond  room  for  doubt,  that  precisely  the  reverse  of  all 
this  is  true.  Instead  of  the  Church  preceding  the  ministry,  the  min- 
istry precedes  the  Church,  and  by  the  preaching  of  the  word  creates 
and  perpetuates  the  Church.  Instead  of  the  office  being  thus  the 
result  of  mere  human  convenience  for  the  orderly  and  profitable  en- 
joyment of  the  word  and  sacraments  in  and  by  the  Church,  it  is  a 
separate  and  divinely  established  institution,  whose  field  is  the  world, 
and  whose  commission  authorizes  those  filling  it  to  go  anywhere  as 
the  accredited  ambassadors  of  Christ.  And  instead  of  each  separate 
congregation  thus  exercising  the  power  of  the  keys  and  entrusting 
men  with  the  holy  office  of  the  ministry,  the  Church  at  large,  com- 
posed of  many  congregations,  acting  in  a  representative  capacity, 
alone,  except  in  case  of  necessit}',  should  do  it.  To  the  Church  in 
her  official  and  organic  oneness  is  the  power  given  to  call  men  into 
the  ministry,  and  this  calling  does  not  create  the  office  but  merely 
fills  it.  Christ  himself  is  its  author,  and  it  is  he  who,  through  the 
Church,  acting  in  her  organic  capacity  in  his  stead,  says  to  all  who 
rightly  enter  the  sacred  office:  "Go  ye  therefore,  and  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost:  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatso- 
ever I  have  commanded  you:  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world,  Amen."     (Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20.) 

But  again:  The  theory  under  consideration  has,  we  are  satisfied, 
if  rightly  considered,  the  weight  and  authority  of  the  apostles  and 
the  early  Church,  also  against  it.  We  know  full  well  that  in  those 
early  days  of  Christianity,  in  many  cases  no  doubt,  the  election  by 
the  congregation  preceded  in  the  order  of  time  the  act  of  ordination 
by  the  apostles  and  by  others ;  and  under  the  circumstances  no 
other  order  could  then  well  have  existed.  The  Church  then  was  in 
its  merely  formative  state.  The  great  truths  and  facts  of  Christian- 
ity, as  taught  by  the  Saviour  during  his  ministry,  and  as  they  oc- 
curred and  were  made  known  during  the  Week  of  Passion  and  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  were  carried  by  the  thousands  who  had  come 
up  to  Judea  and  Jerusalem,  and  afterward  by  others  whom  the  per- 
secution which  arose  scattered  abroad,  into  all  parts  of  the  world. 
And,  as  the  result,  men  and  women  were  won   to   the  truth  which 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  499 

they  thus  heard;  converts  were  rapidly  made;  churches  everywhere 
sprang  quickly  into  existence;  the  persons  in  these  churches  best 
quahfied  were  naturally  chosen  to  serve  as  pastors;  and  afterward 
when  these  churches  were  visited  by  the  apostles,  these  men  whom 
the  churches  had  thus  chosen  as  their  pastors  were  the  ones,  of 
course,  whom  at  the  request  of  the  churches,  the  apostles  ordained. 
It  was  ahogether  the  best,  and  indeed  the  only  order  which  then 
could  be  pursued.  But  whilst  all  this  is  true,  does  not  the  very  fact 
that  they,  under  such  circumstances,  ordained  at  all,  clearly  show 
that  the  election  by  the  church  was  not,  in  their  judgment,  a  true 
induction  into  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  that  the  voice  of  the 
churches  which  had  thus  chosen  them  was  by  no  means  final  in  the 
case,  but  was  submitted  for  final  decision  to  the  apostles  and  to  the 
ministry  whom  they  had  ordained,  as  the  highest  official  represen- 
tatives of  the  whole  Church?  If  upon  examination,  the  apostles  had 
discovered  that  one  thus  presented  to  them  for  ordination  was  un- 
qualified for  the  work  of  the  ministry  to  which  he  had  been  chosen 
by  the  congregation,  they,  of  course,  would  have  refused  to  ordain 
him,  and  in  consequence  he  would  not  have  been  in  the  ministerial 
ofifice,  even  if  the  Church,  defiant  of  apostolic  authority,  would  still 
have  retained  him  as  their  religious  teacher  or  pastor.  So  that  the 
election,  going  before  ordination,  was  the  result  of  the  peculiar  con- 
dition in  which  the  Church  then,  in  its  incipient  or  inchoate  state, 
was,  and  was  not  designed  therefore  to  be  the  order  of  filling  the 
ofifice  of  the  ministry  in  after  times  or  now.  Even  then  already,  no 
doubt,  ordination,  in  some  cases,  was  administered  where  there  had 
been  no  election  to  become  the  pastor  of  some  special  church,  but 
where  the  person  or  persons  ordained  were  by  ordination  simply 
placed  in  the  office  and  commissioned  to  go  wherever  the  Provi- 
dence and  Spirit  of  God  might  lead  them,  preaching  the  word. 
Thus  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  set  apart,  by  the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  of  the  other  teachers  or  ministers  at  Antioch,  for  the  special 
missionary  work  upon  which  they  then  departed.  (Acts  xiii.  2-4.) 
There  is  no  proof  that  Timothy,  when,  "  with  the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  of  the  presbytery,"  he  Was  ordained,  was  ordained  as  the  pastor 
of  some  special  church,  but  simply  that  by  ordination  he  was  brought 
into  the  ministerial  ofifice,  and  thus  fitted  to  receive  election  as  pastor 
The  same  is  true,  also,  of  Titus.  There  is  no  absolute  or  certain 
proof  that  he  was  ordained  to  the  exclusive  and  special  work  in  the 


500  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

island  of  Crete.  Paul  merely  says:  "For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in 
Crete  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting, 
and  ordain  elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee."  (Tit.  i.  5.) 
And  this  command  which  Paul  thus  gives  him,  as  he  also  gave 
Timothy  (2  Tim.  ii.  2),  to  "  ordain  elders  in  every  city,"  does  not 
necessarily  require  that  we  believe  or  suppose  that  these  elders  or 
ministers  thus  ordained  had  all  previously  been  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple as  their  pastors.  They  may  have  been.  There  is  simply  no 
proof  that  they  were. 

And  hence,  in  view  of  all  this,  whilst  in  no  case  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament  was  a  pastor  ever  placed  over  a  congregation  with- 
out the  full  consent  and  desire  of  its  members,  yet  this  desire  and 
consent,  we  are  satisfied,  even  if  expressed  in  a  formal  choice  or 
election,  in  no  instance  was  regarded  as  the  call  into  the  ministry, 
but  this  call  was  always  regarded  as  being  given  in  ordination.  The 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  apostles  or  presbytery  was  the  act  by 
which  the  Church,  in  the  name  of  her  ascended  Lord  and  Head, 
gave  the  I'ite  vocatiis. 

There  are  still  other  objections  to  this  theory  of  thus  making  the 
election  the  call,  and  of  thus  reducing  ordination  to  a  mere  empty 
ceremony. 

It  begs  the  question  with  regard  to  ordination,  declaring  it  to  be 
an  unnecessary  and  useless  form  merely  of  approving  by  the  Church 
at  large  what  the  individual  congregation  has  done,  which  is,  indeed, 
the  very  point  at  issue  or  in  dispute. 

It  is  in  direct  conflict  also  with  the  conception  of  unity  as  an 
attribute  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ,  and,  by  thus  giving  to  each 
congregation  the  right  to  exercise  the  power  of  the  keys  and  to  ad- 
mit men  to  the  office  of  the  ministry,  it  makes  the  Church  no  longer 
"one  Holy  Catholic  Church,"  but  a  mere  multiple  of  separate  and 
independent  churches. 

Again:  it  places  the  power  of  deciding  upon  the  qualifications  of 
candidates  for  the  ministry  in  the  hands  of  those,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  least  able  wisely  and  well  to  decide  upon  them;  for  who  will 
claim  that  there  is  in  the  churches  that'measure  of  scriptural  intelli- 
gence and  discriminating  knowledge  of  the  ability  and  fitness  de- 
manded in  the  ministry,  which  would  make  it  safe  or  right  to  submit  to 
popular  vote  the  question  of  who  shall  and  who  shall  not  constitute 
the  ministry  ?     [Ev.  Revieiv,  vol.  xi.,  p.  323).     Practically  carried  out, 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  5OI 

and  literally  executed,  it  is  a  theory  which  would,  we  feel  sure,  so 
degrade  and  lower  the  standard  of  ministerial  qualification  and  effi- 
ciency, and  so  involve  the  Church  in  peril  from  within  herself,  as  to 
render  her  utterly  weak  and  defenceless  against  her  foes,  and  imperil 
her  very  being. 

And  so  evident  is  this,  that  even  those  who  hold  to  this  view  that 
with  the  congregations  rests  the  right  to  call,  and  who  strenuously 
insist  upon  it  as  the  correct  theory  concerning  the  ministerial  call, 
nevertheless  do  not  absolutely  and  rigidly  adhere  to  it  in  practice. 
Among  our  Missouri  Lutheran  brethren,  e.  g.,  for  whom  I  am  sure 
I  cherish  the  profoundest  Christian  regard,  when  a  congregation  be- 
comes vacant,  instead  of  acting  for  itself  in  strict  independence,  and 
instead  of  electing,  without  consultation  or  regard  for  synodical  au- 
thority, either  one  of  its  own  number  or  another  from  abroad,  as  its 
pastor,  as  a  rule,  first  of  all,  it  applies  to  the  President  of  the  S3aiod, 
who,  in  his  official  position,  expresses  for  the  time  being  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Church  general  in  so  far  as  it  is  represented  in  the 
Synod,  and  whomsoever  he  names  and  commends  to  them  as  pos- 
sessing suitable  ministerial  gifts,  and  as  worthy  of  their  confidence 
and  suffrage,  the  congregation  elects;  the  very  thing  in  substance 
which  is  done  among  us  when  in  Ministerium  we  ordain  a  man  and 
thus  commend  him  to  the  churches,  and  when  subsequently  a 
church,  having  confidence  in  the  recommendation  thus  given,  chooses 
him  to  be  its  pastor.  In  both  cases  the  judgment  of  the  ministry, 
and  not  that  of  the  congregation  itself,  determines  the  choice. 

But,  yet  another  very  serious  objection  to  the  theor)'  we  are  com- 
bating lies  in  the  view  of  the  ministerial  office  itself  which  it  neces- 
sitates and  assumes.  As  it  appears  to  us  it  virtually  abolishes  the 
office.  Accepting  the  view  that  the  source  of  the  objective  or  out- 
ward call  is  the  individual  or  local  church,  instead  of  the  Church 
Catholic  as  the  body  of  Christ,  and  assuming  that  it  does  consist  in 
the  temporary  transfer,  for  the  mere  sake  of  order  and  propriety  in 
public  worship,  of  the  priestly  functions  and  rights  possessed  by  all 
the  members  as  part  of  the  universal  priesthood,  to  the  one  whom 
they  thus  choose  to  be  their  pastor,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as 
a  separate,  divinely-instituted,  and  divinely-perpetuated  ministerial 
office,  and  what  is  called  the  ministerial  office  is  merely  a  nice  and 
convenient  human  arrangement.  Under  such  an  order  of  things 
there  is  no  office  of  the  ministry  at  all. 
33 


502  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Then  a  man,  if  a  pastor,  is  a  minister,  and  if  not  a  pastor  he  is  not 
a  minister.  Then  he  is  in  the  ministry  to-day,  and  out  of  it  to- 
morrow. Then  the  ministry  exists  only  while  performing  ministerial 
acts.  Then  ordination,  if  proper  and  necessary  once,  is  equally 
proper  and  necessary,  and  should  be  repeated,  at  each  change  of 
pastoral  field.  Then  men  who  have  been  ordained  as  pastors,  and 
afterwards  become  missionaries  in  heathen  lands,  or  professors  in 
our  colleges  and  seminaries,  or  editors  of  our  ecclesiastical  journals, 
are  no  longer  in  the  ministerial  office,  but  sustain  to  the  Church  the 
mere  relation  of  laymen.  Surely  this  is  no  proper  conception  of  the 
office.  Men  whom  God  has  called  to  the  office  are  not  thus  called 
into  it  or  dropped  out  of  it  by  the  mere  existence  or  non-existence 
of  actual  pastoral  relations.  On  the  contrary,  the  office  exists  by 
divine  institution  in  the  Church.  The  call,  based  upon  suitable 
qualifications,  uttered  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  conscience  of  the 
subject,  and  recognized  and  solemnly  declared  by  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  the  presbytery  as  the  organ  of  the  Church  in  her  cor- 
porate or  official  capacity,  places  the  man  in  the  office;  and  in  that 
office  he  abides,  remains  a  minister  and  not  a  layman — whether  a 
pastor  or  not — until  by  death,  or  by  the  same  authority  by  which 
he  was  instrumentally  placed  in  it,  he  is  removed  from  it.  And 
hence  the  election  of  a  man  .to  be  the  pastor  of  a  church,  instead  of 
thereby  making  him  a  minister,  or  putting  him  into  the  ministerial 
office,  is  simply,  if  done  rightly,  the  expression  on  the  part  of  that 
church  of  their  belief  that  he  is,  by  virtue  of  his  ordination,  a  true 
minister,  and  that  as  such  they  choose  him  to  be  their  pastor.  His 
ordination  was  his  call;  and  now  their  election  of  him  as  pastor  is  a 
providential  indication  to  him  of  the  special  field  where  God  wishes 
him  to  exercise  his  ministerial  gifts.* 

*"  The  word  of  God  and  our  Book,"  says  Dr.  Hodge,  "teach  that  the  right 
to  rule,  to  preach,  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and  to  ordain,  belongs  to  every 
minister  by  virtue  of  his  office.  If  a  man  is  ordained  a  presbyter,  he  has,  by 
authority  of  Scripture,  all  these  rights ;  and  he  cannot  be  deprived  of  the  one 
any  more  than  of  the  others.  He  has  indeed  no  right  to  exercise  his  authority 
either  to  preach  or  to  rule  in  a  particular  congregation  without  their  consent ; 
but  their  election  no  more  makes  him  a  ruler  than  it  makes  him  a  preacher. 
*  *  *  To  say  that  a  man  cannot  be  a  presbyter  except  in  virtue  of  his  con- 
nection with  a  particular  Church,  is  as  much  as  to  say  a  man  cannot  be  a  physi- 
cian without  a  prescribed  number  of  patients,  or  a  captain  if  not  in  actual  com- 
mand of  a  ship,  or  a  general  unless  when  at  the  head  of  a  brigade.    Owen  con- 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  503 

Luther's  views  are,  of  course,  as  we  have  already  said,  directly 
opposed  to  the  position  which  we  have  thus  taken.  And  yet  in  our 
interpretation  of  his  views,  both  justice  to  him  and  to  the  truth 
requires  that  we  should  well  consider  the  special  character  of  the 
conflict  which  Luther  was  then  waging,  and  the  necessity  which 
was  then  laid  upon  him,  in  the  prosecution  of  his  reformatory  work, 
to  emphasize  sharply,  and  to  defend  jealously,  individual  and  con- 
gregational Christian  rights  over  against  the  hierarchical  despotism 
of  Rome,  which  denied  to  the  people  the  privilege  of  choosing  spir- 
itual shepherds,  and  withheld  from  them  the  preached  word  and 
sacraments  in  their  completeness  and  purity.  Li  the  emergency 
and  necessity  thus  laid  upon  him,  and  as  the  best  possible  weapon 
which  he  could  use  against  the  crushing  tyranny  which  the  Papacy 
was  then  exercising  over  the  Church,  he  revived  the  long-forgotten 
doctrine  of  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  exhibited  and  de- 
fended it  with  all  the  force  and  vigor  of  his  strong  and  enthusiastic 
nature,  and  made  a  practical  application  of  it  as  a  remedy  for  then 
existing  evils,  which  possibly  the  exigency  of  the  times  demanded, 
and  in  doing  which  he  undoubtedly  acted  with  the  utmost  sincerity, 
but  which,  nevertheless,  in  the  normal  and  established  condition  of 
Protestantism,  now  and  since  Luther  fought  and  won  his  great  battle, 
is  not  needed  and  cannot  safely  be  practiced.  As  Dr.  Plitt  [Eijileit- 
nng  in  die  Aiigustana,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  374-376),  correctly  says:  "  He  so 
strongly  emphasized  that  the  official  action  was  identical  with  the 
individual  action  of  every  Christian  in  order  to  oppose  the  haughty 
spirit  of  the  Romish  officials,  who  were  exalting  themselves  above 
all  others,  declaring  their  action  to  be  sacramental,  and  trying  to 
rule  over  the  whole  Church."  And  again  :  "  In  order  to  cut  off  all 
possible  false  inferences  and  conclusions,  we  must  not  forget  that 
Luther  was  brought  to  this  sharp  emphasizing  of  the  rights  of  the 

sistently  carries  out  this  doctrine,  and  maintains  that  as  no  man  can  be  a  bishop 
or  presbyter,  but  in  relation  to  a  particular  congregation,  no  Church  has  a  right 
to  ordain  a  man  to  preach  to  the  heathen  (Works,  vol.  xx.,  p.  457).  When  a 
theory  comes  to  such  an  issue,  it  may  fairly  be  assumed  to  have  broken  its 
neck.  In  the  Apostolic  Church  all  ministers  ruled.  They  met  together  with 
the  apostles  and  brethren  to  decide  important  questions  ;  they  formed  churches 
and  ordained  elders  ;  and  yet  not  one  in  ten  of  those  ministers  was  a  pastor,  or 
sustained  any  special  or  permanent  relation  to  any  particular  church.  Presby- 
terians do  not  believe  that  Timothy  was  the  pastor  of  Ephesus,  or  Titus  the 
bishop  of  Crete."     {Church  Polity,  pp.  267-268). 


504  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

individual  congregation,  by  the  then  existing  times.  It  was  a  time  of 
great  distress  in  the  Church.  The  official  representatives  of  the 
Church  were  not  wiUing  to  fill  the  office  in  the  individual  congrega- 
tions with  preachers  of  the  pure  truth.  They  abused  their  right  of 
calling  a  person  into  the  office  to  the  damage  of  the  Church,  while 
there  were  in  the  congregation  believing  members  of  the  Church,  or 
evangelical  Christians.  This  was  the  condition  of  things  which  de- 
manded peculiar  advice  and  extraordinary  measures.  And  in  view 
of  this  Luther  wrote:  "As  a  Christian  congregation  must  not  and 
cannot  be  without  the  word  of  God,  it  is  evident  that  they  must  also 
have  teachers  or  preachers  proclaiming  that  word."  {Walch.,  xxii., 
146.)  Every  individual  Christian  has  the  right,  and  it  is  his  duty, 
should  necessity  7<rgently  demand  it,  to  act  as  teacher.  How  much 
more,  then,  is  it  right  that  a  whole  congregation  call  one  to  this 
office,  if  need  be,  as  is  at  all  times,  and  especially  now,  the  case.  It 
is  the  duty  of  the  individual  congregation  to  fill  the  office,  regard- 
less of  others,  in  case  of  necessity.  Luther  always  adds  this,  and  in 
calling  for  such  (congregational)  action,  he  never  forgets  to  empha- 
size that  the  congregation  concerned  should  examine  itself  whether 
it  stands  firm  in  the  faith,  and  thus  have  a  good  conscience  with  re- 
gard to  the  action  which  it  thus  performs.  Being  assured  of  this,  it 
can  cheerfully  act  as  in  the  name  of  God." 

The  one  essential  thing,  then,  in  Luther's  estimation,  was  the 
preaching  of  the  pure  word  of  God  and  the  right  administration  of 
the  sacraments.  This  constituted  the  Church.  To  this  the  Church 
was  entitled.  And  hence,  in  case  of  necessity,  and  where  those  hav- 
ing the  power  of  appointing  or  ordaining  ministers  for  the  Church 
abuse  their  power,  and  seek  to  place  over  the  churches  pastors  who 
will  withhold  the  pure  word  and  sacraments  from  them,  there,  under 
such  circumstances,  and  as  a  final  and  only  remedy  for  such  evils, 
each  congregation,  upon  the  strength  of  the  spiritual  priesthood  to 
which  every  baptized  member  belongs,  shall  choose  or  elect  for  it- 
self a  pastor,  and  such  election,  even  without  ordination,  shall  be 
and  is  a  true  call  of  the  one  thus  chosen  to  the  office  of  the  minis- 
try. And  evidently  all  that  Luther  aimed  at,  in  all  that  he  says  with 
regard  to  the  right  of  a  congregation  to  call  into  the  office  of  the 
the  ministry,  was  to  preserve  the  churches  from  having  unworthy 
and  false  teachers  imposed  upon  them  against  their  consent.  They 
had,  he  claimed,  the  essential  right  to  say  who  should,  and  who 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  505 

should  not,  be  their  pastors.     And  the  question  primarily  was  not 
so  much  whether  election  was  the  call,  as  whether  there  existed  the 
right  with  the  people  to  elect;  and  only  in  order  to  vindicate  this 
congregational  right  to  elect  was   he  led,  upon  the  ground  of  the 
universal  priesthood  of  believers,  to  take  the  position  that,  in  case 
of  necessity,  such  election,  even  without  ordination,  was  a  valid  and 
true  call.     "We  do  not  say,"  is   the   language  of  the   Wittenberg 
theologians,  "  that  the  Romish  method  of  calling  pastors  is  in  every 
particular  wrong,  in  that  the  bishops  ordain  ministers ;  but  we  cannot 
approve  their  course  in  placing  pastors  over  churches  without  the 
knowledge  or  consent  of  the  people,  because,  according  to  the  old 
saying,  'The  calling  of  a  pastor,  without  the  consent  of  the  people, 
is  null  and  void.'  "      {Quoted  by  Dr.  Dichl,  Ltith.  Diet,  1877,  p.  305). 
That  Luther  did  not,  in  thus  seeking  to  defend  his  position  over 
against  the  tyrannical  claims  of  Rome,  often  press  too  far  his  doc- 
trine of  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  and  of  the  office  of  the 
ministry  as  the  result  merely  of  the  delegated  or  deputed  rights  of 
the  many  to  the  few  who,  for  the  sake  of  order  in  worship,  were  to 
conduct  the  public  services  and  act  as  pastors,  we  are  not  willing  to 
maintain.     On  the   contrary,  we  believe  that   he  did,  and  that  the 
office  of  the  ministry,  as  we   have   already   said,  has   an   infinitely 
higher  origin,  is  divine   in   its  source,  and   exists   as  a  distinct  and 
divinely  perpetuated  ordinance  in  the  Church.     The  doctrine  of  a 
spiritual  priesthood  is  undoubtedly  a  precious  truth,  and  in  electing 
a   man   as  their  pastor,  the   members  of  a   church   do,  as   Luther 
taught,  delegate  to   him   the   exercise   in   public   worship  of  their 
priestly  functions,  but   in  doing  so  they  do  not  put   him  into  the 
office  of  the  ministry,  but   simply  into   a   pastoral  care  over  them- 
selves; for  the  Church,  not  as  a  mere  fragment  or  part,  but  in  her 
organic  and  representative  whole,  has  the  power  of  the  keys.     "The 
office  of  teaching  and   administration  is  the  glory  of  the  Church's 
organization,  and  while  it  takes  away  from  the  spiritual  priesthood 
none   of  its   special    glory,    neither   does    it    borrow    its    light    and 
authority  therefrom.     There  is  a  spiritual   priesthood;  but  distinct 
from  it,  yea,  going  before  it,  is  the  office  of  reconciliation,  for  whose 
perpetuation  the  Head  of  the  Church  has  made  special  preparation 
and    instituted    a    certain    order."     {Ev.  Review,  vol.  xi.,    p.    339.) 
And   even    Luther    himself,  in   his   late  writings,  reveals,  if  not  a 
decided  change,  at  least  a  great  modification  of  his  earlier  views 


506  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

upon  this  whole  subject  of  the  relation  between  the  Christian  priest- 
hood of  believers  and  the  office  of  the  ministry.  Instead  of  regard- 
ing the  office  of  the  ministry  as  the  product  merely  of  the  delegated 
rights  and  functions  of  fellow  Christians  as  equal  priests,  he 
evidently  conceived  it,  more  and  more  distinctly,  as  an  ordinance  of 
God,  and  as  an  office  in  the  Church  and  for  the  Church,  but  still 
not  essentially  of  the  Church.  It  is  true,  he  nowhere  in  a  formal 
manner  retracts  his  earlier  views  and  expressly  declares  that  his 
opinions  have  changed,  but,  as  has  been  clearly  shown  by  those 
who  have  specially  examined  his  writings  in  this  respect,  it  is  yet 
simply  a  fact  that  Luther,  in  his  later  years,  assumed  substantially 
a  different  position  in  regard  to  the  relation  of  the  universal  priest- 
hood to  the  ministerial  office,  from  the  position  which  he  so  tenaci- 
ously maintained  in  his  earlier  years.  He  more  and  more  came  to 
relinquish  his  theory  of  delegation  of  priestly  rights  and  duties  by 
the  many  to  the  one,  as  the  source  and  establishment  of  the  office, 
and  conceived  it  more  and  more  as  a  distinct  and  purely  divine 
office,  founded  by  Christ,  and  filled  by  the  apostles  and  their  suc- 
cessors, in  regular  and  unbroken  ministerial  succession.  [See 
"  Luther  on  the  Office  of  the  Ministiyy  translated  from  the  German 
of  Dr.  A.  W.  Dieckhoff,  by  Rev.  Prof  Martin  Ev.  Review,  vol. 
xxi.,  p.  182.) 

Thus  receding,  with  his  advancing  years,  from  his  earlier  views 
with  regard  to  the  relation  between  the  universal  priesthood  of 
believers  and  the  office  of  the  ministry,  Luther,  we  may  now  add, 
must  also,  logically  and  necessarily,  have  receded  from  the  position 
that  the  call  to  the  ministry  is  rightly  given  through  or  by  the  in- 
dividual congregation,  and  is  limited  in  the  exercise  of  its  functions 
to  the  congregation,  but  must,  more  and  more  clearly,  have  gradu- 
ally come  to  see  that  such  a  call  can  lawfully  be  given  only  in  ordi- 
nation, by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Ministerium  as  the 
official  and  authoritative  organ  and  expression  of  the  Church 
universal  as  the  Body  of  Christ. 

The  answer  then,  in  view  of  all  that  has  been  said,  to  the  question, 
"  Wlien,  or  in  what  distinct  act,  does  the  Cliurch  lawfully  exercise  her 
jus  vocandi,  or  right  of  calling?"  at  which  we  arrive,  is  this:  The 
Church  thus  exercises  lawfully  her  right  of  calling,  or,  by  virtue  of 
the  power  of  the  keys  which  she  possesses,  gives  the  true  call  to 
the  office  of  the  ministry,  not  in  the  act  of  election  by  an  individual 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  507 

congregation,  but  in  the  solemn  act  of  ordination  by  the  laying  on 
of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,  or  of  those  who  represent  and  act  for 
the  Church  in  her  Catholic  unity  and  entirety  as  the  corporate  and 
unbroken  Body  of  which  Christ  is  the  universal  and  ever-living 
divine  head.  Ordination  gives  the  call,  and  the  call  which  is  thus 
given  is  the  only  true  outward  call  into  the  ministerial  office  which 
the  Church  either  does  or  can  give.  Election,  on  the  other  hand, 
when  rightly  and  properly  effected,  is  simply  the  choice,  on  the 
part  of  a  congregation,  of  one  who  by  ordination  is  already  in  the 
office,  as  its  pastor,  in  order  that  he  may  in  that  relation  exercise 
the  functions  of  the  office  with  which  he  had  by  ordination  been 
entrusted.  Ordination,  therefore,  except  in  cases  of  extremity  or 
necessity,  in  the  order  of  time  comes  first,  and  election  comes  after. 
Ordination  gives  the  office;  election  gives  the  opportunity  for  the 
proper  and  lawful  exercise  of  the  office.  Ordination  makes  a  man 
a  minister  of  the  Gospel ;  election  recognizes  him  as  such,  and  in- 
vites him  to  his  official  work  because  he  is  a  minister. 

Having  thus  answered  our  first  question,  "When,  or  in  what  spe- 
cial act,  does  the  Church  lawfully  exercise  her  right  of  calling?" 
we  proceed  to  the  discussion  of  our  second,  viz : 

Through  whom  does  the  Church  lawfully  and  properly  perform  this 
act,  or  give  this  call  to  the  ministerial  office  ? 

Assuming,  as  we  have  tried  to  prove,  that  ordination  is  the  special 
act  in  which  induction  into  the  ministerial  office  occurs,  or  in  which 
the  Church  gives  the  call,  the  question  now  arises,  by  whom  is  this 
ordination  to  be  administered  ?  Through  whom,  as  participants  in 
the  act,  does  the  Church  thus  give  the  call?  Is  this  ordinance  of 
inducting  into  the  office  administered  wholly  by  those  in  the  office, 
or  are  others  also  to  join  with  the  ministry  in  its  administration? 
In  a  word,  by  whom  does  the  Church,  in  the  act  of  ordination,  ex- 
press her  judgment,  and  give  the  call  to  the  office  of  the  ministry? 

I  use  the  word  ''  ordination ^  in  this  connection,  in  its  widest 
sense,  including  the  examination  of  the  candidate,  the  decision  with 
regard  to  his  qualification  or  fitness  for  the  office,  and  then  the  sol- 
emn ceremony  or  act  itself,  consisting  in  the  "  laying  on  of  hands" 
according  to  apostolic  practice. 

As  is  well  known,  there  are,  even  among  those  who  hold  that  the 
call  should  be  given,  not  by  an  individual  Chu'rch,  but  by  the 
Church  general  in  her  representative  or  corporate  capacity,  differ- 


508  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ent  opinions  as  to  the  persons  by  whom  properly  this  act  of  thus 
ordaining  or  inducting  into  the  ministerial  office  should  be  per- 
formed. The  one  theory  or  opinion  regards  the  ministry,  or  those 
in  the  ministerial  office,  the  "  Ordo  "  itself,  as  the  only  proper  agent 
for  its  legitimate  and  right  performance.  The  other  theory  or  opin- 
ion regards  the  ministry  ajid  the  laity,  in  joint  synodical  relation,  as 
the  proper  agent  or  instrument  by  which  the  induction  into  the 
sacred  office  should  be  made.  The  one  theory  expresses  itself  in 
the  "Formula  of  Government,"  framed  by  our  fathers,  in  the  words 
which  declare:  "The  ^/^r^  shall  then  hold  a  meeting  consisting 
exclusively  of  Scripture  elders,  that  is  preachers,  for  the  purpose  of 
attending  to  those  duties  which  Christ  and  his  apostles  enjoined 
upon  them  alone,  viz.,  examination,  licensure  and  ordination  of  can- 
didates for  the  ministry.  This  meeting  is  called  the  ministerium 
or  presbytery,  by  which  in  Scripture  is  meant  ministers  alone." 
[Fonmila,  ch.,  xvii.,  sec.  i.)  The  other  theory  expresses  itself  in 
words  like  the  following:  "  It  is  both  the  right  and  the  duty  of  the 
whole  Church,  through  her  representatives,  clerical  and  lay,  to  take 
an  active  part  in  the  discussions  and  decisions  of  all  questions  affect- 
ing her  welfare,  and  among  others,  especially  also  in  the  great  ques- 
tion as  to  who  shall  constitute  her  ministry."  [Ev.  Reviezv,  vol. 
xii.,  p.  405.)  And,  for  the  practical  adoption  of  this  latter  theory, 
whether  wisely  or  not  time  will  reveal,  provision  has  been  made  by 
our  General  Synod  in  her  revised  Constitution  for  District  Synods, 
where  it  is  declared  :  "  In  all  cases  where  District  Synods  have  not 
made  provision  for  a  Ministerium,  zW  the  powers  and  duties  pre- 
scribed in  this  Article  [on  Ministerinm)  shall  devolve  on  the  Synod." 
(Article  viii.,  sec.  14.) 

To  this  second  theory  there  are,  in  my  judgment,  clear  and 
weighty  objections;  and  the  first  theory,  therefore,  which  maintains 
that  ordination  is  properly  the  act  alone  of  the  ordained,  or  that 
those  only  who  are  themselves  rightly  in  the  office  can  rightly  in- 
duct others  into  it,  is  the  theory  which  I  believe  accords  best  both 
with  the  intrinsic  fitness  of  things  or  essential  requirements  of  the 
case,  and  the  indications  or  teachings  upon  the  subject  of  the  word 
of  God.  The  advocates  of  the  former  of  these  two  theories,  namely 
that  the  laity  should  also  have  a  voice  in  determining  who  shall  con- 
stitute the  ministry,  do  not,  it  should  in  justice  to  them  be  said,  ask 
that  the  immediate  act  of  ordination  itself,  the  laying  on  of  hands, 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  509 

or  the  public  ceremony  by  which  the  candidate  is  set  apart  to  the 
work  of  the  ministry,  should  be  participated  in  by  the  hiity.  This 
they  admit  should  be  done  by  the  ministry  only.  All  that  they  de- 
mand is  that  the  laity  should  sit  with  the  clergy  in  the  examination 
into  the  qualification  or  fitness  for  the  office  of  the  candidate,  and 
should  have  a  vote  or  voice  in  determining  who  shall  be  ordained. 
"  I  have  not  only,"  says  one  distinguished  advocate  of  the  supposed 
rights  of  the  laity  in  the  matter,  "  no  objection  to  ministers  ordaining 
ministers,  but  believe  that  it  is  very  proper  and  becoming  that  they 
should  do  this."  And  another  equally  respected  champion  for  lay 
rights,  in  determining  who  shall  fill  the  ministerial  office,  uses  this 
language  :  "  Nor  does  this  proposition  contemplate  any  interference 
on  the  part  of  the  laity  with  any  of  the  prerogatives  that  can  be 
rlearlv  shown  to  belong  to  the  ministry,  as  for  instance,  their  right 
and  duty  to  ordain,  i.  c,  solemnly  set  apart  to  their  official  work,  by 
prayer  and  the  imposition  of  hands,  those  whom  God  has  called, 
through  the  Church,  to  that  department  of  Christian  activity.  Or- 
dination is  evidently  set  forth  in  the  Scriptures  as  a  presbyterial,  /.  e., 
ministerial  act,  and  should  therefore  be  performed  by  ministers 
alone.  And  all  the  opposition  manifested  to  the  proposed  change, 
on  the  ground  that  the  laity  have  no  right  to  ordain,  arose  from  an 
entire  misapprehension  of  the  question  at  issue.  No  claim  of  that 
kind  is  set  up  on  behalf  of  the  laity.  We  have  no  sympathy  what- 
ever with  those  who  claim  for  the  so-called  lay-elders  a  right  to 
participate  in  this  solemnity."  {^Evangelical  Review,  Vol.  XII.,  p. 
403.)  And  a  more  recent  defender  of  the  laity  over  against  the 
ministry,  upon  this  question  of  ordination,  narrows  the  point  of  dis- 
pute, if  possible,  still  more.  "  The  actual  point  of  difference,"  he 
says,  "is  neither  who  shall  exariiine  candidates  for  licensure  nor 
who  shall  ordain,  that  is,  perform  the  ceremony  of  induction  into 
the  sacred  office.  About  the  superior  competency  and  the  propri- 
ety of  the  ministry  to  conduct  the  examination  of  candidates,  or 
about  the  special  fitness  and  more  orderly  mode  of  the  ministry 
performing  the  act  of  ordination,  there  is  no  variance  of  opinion. 
It  must  be  borne  in  mind  distinctly  that  the  present  is  not  a  case  of 
either  competency,  fitness,  or  order,  but  a  case  of  inherent  author- 
ity or  power.  The  real  question,  then,  about  which  there  can  be 
any  dispute  among  those  who  adhere  to  the  Lutheran  view  of 
Church  polity,  is,  to  whom  has  been  delegated  primarily  the  author- 
ity to  license  and  ordain."     {Quarterly  Review,  Vol.  VI.,  p.  250.) 


5IO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  point  at  issue,  then,  in  answer  to  the  special  question  now 
before  us,  namely,  "  Through  whom  does  the  Church  lawfully  and 
properly  perform  the  act  of  ordination  or  give  the  call  to  the  minis- 
terial office?"  is,  whether  the  laity  are  entitled  to  take  any  part 
whatever  in  determining  to  whom  the  call  to  the  office  of  the 
ministry  shall  be  given.  Does  the  Church  in  giving  the  call  ex- 
press or  decide  such  call  alone  through  tJie  ministry,  as  her  repre- 
sentatives and  acting  in  her  stead,  or  does  she  do  so  through  the 
joint  action,  as  her  representatives,  both  of  the  ministry  and  laity? 
That  the  true  call  to  the  office  of  the  ministry  is  given  only  and 
solely  through  the  ministry,  as  the  divinely  appointed  representa- 
tives of  the  Church,  and  that  the  laity  are  entitled  to  no  participa- 
tion whatever  in  determining  to  whom  it  shall  be  given,  is  evident 
to  my  mind,  if  not  to  that  of  others,  for  a  number  of  reasons. 

(i)  One  reason  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  opposite  view  rests,  in  its 
very  foundation,  upon  certain  mere  assumptions,  or  mere  half-truths 
at  best. 

One  of  these  mere  assumptions  or  half-truths  is  the  false  or  one- 
sided view  of  the  Church  as  a  Republic,  an  ecclesiastical  Democracy, 
in  which  the  popular  will  and  popular  suffrage  are  the  source  of 
authority  and  power.  There  is,  of  course,  some  truth  in  this  view; 
but  by  no  means  the  whole  truth,  nor  the  chief  and  essential  truth. 
The  Church  of  Christ,  in  its  essential  elements,  is  not  a  Republic, 
but  a  Kingdom.  (Psalm  ii.  6;  Dan.  vii.  14;  Eph.  i.  22-23).  But 
if  the  Church  is  thus  a  Kingdom,  then  the  source  of  power  and 
authority  is  not  in  the  ruled,  but  in  the  ruler;  not  in  popular  suffrage, 
but  in  the  order  of  things  as  established  in  the  very  organization  of 
the  Church  by  the  Divine  King  of  this  Kingdom;  for  in  a  King- 
dom the  authority  does  not  flow  from  below  upward,  but  from  above 
downward.  And  this  is  precisely,  as  we  think,  where  exists  the 
source  of  authority  with  regard  to  the  office  and  perpetuation  of  the 
ministry.  If  the  Church  is  a  pure  Republic,  a  mere  Democracy, 
then,  without  a  single  word  of  debate,  we  will  freely  admit  that  the 
laity  shall  share  in  giving  the  call  to  the  ministry;  and  will  also 
admit  that  they  alone  shall  give  it;  for  then,  as  a  divine  institution, 
there  is  no  office  of  the  ministry  at  all  in  the  Church.  But  if,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Church  is  a  Kingdom,  and  Christ  is  the  Head  and 
King,  then  is  there  also  a  government  over  the  Church ;  and  if  there 
be  a  government,  then  also  must  there,  by  divine  appointment,  be  offi- 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  5II 

cers  to  whom  is  intrusted  the  exercise  of  tlie  authority  and  functions 
of  that  i^overnmcnt.  These  officers,  at  first  appointed  or  commissioned 
by  the  King  himself,  were  the  Apostles.  Since  the  Apostles,  and  vir- 
tually as  their  successors,  the  officers  in  this  Kingdom  of  Christ  are 
the  gospel  ministry.*  For  whilst  in  the  gift  of  inspiration,  and  in  the 
power  of  working  miracles,  and  in  the  ability  of  discerning  spirits, 
and  in  some  other  respects,  the  Apostles  stand  alone  and  have  no 
successors,  yet  as  the  commissioned  and  authorized  expounders  of 
the  King's  message,  as  the  administrators  of  his  sacraments,  and  as 
the  possessors  of  the  right  to  exercise  the  power  of  the  keys,  they 
have  successors,  and  those  successors  are  not  a  line  of  popes  or 
bishops  as  a  superior  and  distinct  order,  but  the  Christian  Ministry, 
filling  an  office  whose  chief  work  is  the  preaching  of  the  divine 
word.  But  this  office,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  or  in  view  of 
the  very  fact  that  the  Church  is  not  a  Republic  but  a  Kingdom,  can- 
not be  filled  by  the  voice  and  suffi-age  of  the  people,  but  can  only 
be    filled,  either    immediately  by  the  King  himself,   or   mediately 

*"Our  Lord  before  His  ascension  instituted  the  office  of  the  Apostolate,'\\2iV- 
ing  within  it  all  the  powers  of  the  future  ministry.  The  Apostolate  had  extra- 
ordinary and  incommunicable  powers  and  functions.  It  had  also  ordinary 
and  communicable  powers  and  functions,  which  were  to  be  transmitted  and 
perpetuated  in  and  through  the  ordinary  ministry  to  the  end  of  the  world." 
(Mark  iii.  13,  14;  Matt.  x.  2;  Luke  vi.  13;  Acts  i.  2-25;  Rom.  i.  5;  i  Cor.  xii. 
28,  29  ;  Eph.  ii.  20  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  2  ;  Rev.  xxi.  14  ;  i  Tim.  ii.  7  ;  2  Tim.  i.  1 1  ;  2 
Peteri.  i;   iTim.i.  18;  2  Tim.  i,  13;  2Tim.ii.2;  Matt,  xxviii.  20;  2  Cor.  v.  19.) 

"  In  addition  to  their  extraordinary  or  special  powers  and  functions,  the  Apos- 
tles had  the  ordinary  ones,  common  to  the  whole  ministry,  to  wit :  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel,  conferring  the  sacraments,  administering  discipline,  and  or- 
daining others  to  the  ministry.  In  each  and  all  of  these  they  were  but  fellow- 
presbyters,  ministers,  pastors  and  bishops  with  other  ministers."  (Acts  i.  20; 
V.  42  ;  XX.  24  ;  Rom.  i.  15  ;  Eph.  iii.  8  ;  vi.  19  ;  i  Cor.  iv.  i  ;  Matt,  xxviii.  19  ; 
I  Peter  v.  i  ;   i  Cor.  iii    5  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  23 ;  Col.  i.  7,  23-25;  John  xxi.  16.) 

"In  their  extraordinary  powers  and  functions,  the  Apostles  had  no  successors. 
In  their  ordinary  ones  all  true  ministers  of  Christ  are  their  successors.  There  is 
a  ministerial  succession  unbroken  in  the  Church;  but  there  is  no  personal  suc- 
cession in  a  particular  line  of  transmission.  The  ministry  that  is,  ordains  the 
ministry  that  comes.  The  ministry  of  successive  generations  has  always  been 
inducted  into  the  office  of  the  ministry  preceding  ;  but  the  so-called  apostolical 
succession  or  canonical  succession  does  not  exist,  would  be  incapable  of  de- 
monstration if  it  did  exist,  and  would  be  of  no  essential  value  even  if  it  could 
be  demonstrated."  (i  Tim.  i.  18;  iv.  14;  v.  22;  Acts  xiv.  23;  2  Tim.  ii.  2; 
Titus  i.  5). —  'Ihetical  Statement  of  the  Doctrine  i.oncerning  the  Ministry  of  the 
Gospel,  by  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth. 


512  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

by  those  whom  the  King  has  authorized  so  to  do  in  his  stead. 
Those  thus  authorized  are,  we  feel  convinced,  not  the  Church,  as  a 
mere  popular  assembly,  but  the  ministry  as  part  of  the  Church,  act- 
ing in  the  name  of  Christ  and  with  the  authority  of  Christ,  for  the 
Church. 

Another  assumption  or  half-truth  upon  which  the  right  is  claimed 
for  the  laity  to  share  in  filling  the  ministerial  office,  is  that  which 
regards  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  as  the  source  of  the 
ministerial  office.  We  have  already  expressed  ourselves  freely  upon 
this  point.  But  this  we  wish  yet  here  most  emphatically  to  express, 
namely  that  the  office  of  the  ministry  is  purely  and  only  an  office 
o^  diinne  institution.  Or,  in  the  words  of  another:  "The  Christian 
Ministry  is  of  direct  divine  appointment,  and  whilst  the  call  may  be 
mediated  through  the  Church,  it  is  no  growth  or  development  out 
of  any  universal  priesthood.  The  doctrine  of  development  or  evo- 
lution, as  applied  to  the  ministry,  has  no  more  foundation  in  the 
word  of  God  than  it  has  in  the  world  of  nature.  In  both  cases  it 
tends  to  exclude  a  designing  and  governing  Mind  :  in  the  one  we 
must  dispense  with  an  all-wise  Creator,  in  the  other  with  him  who 
is  Head  over  all  to  his  Church.  In  the  Smalcald  Articles  we  read, 
not  that  the  offiice  of  the  ministry  springs  out  of  the  universal 
priesthood  of  believers,  but  : 

"  We  are  clearly  taught  that  the  office  of  the  ministry  originates 
from  the  common  call  of  the  Apostles." 

Again  : 

"It  must  be  confessed,  that  the  Church  is  not  built  upon  the 
power  of  any  man,  but  it  is  built  upon  that  office  which  bears  the 
confession  made  by  Peter,  namely  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  the  Son 
of  the  living  God  (Matt.  xvi.  t6)  ;  for  this  reason  Christ  also  speaks 
unto  him  as  a  minister  of  that  office,  in  which  this  confession  and 
docrine  should  exist;  and  he  says:  Upon  this  rock,  that  is,  upon 
this  doctrine  and  ministerial  office." 

The  German  has,  diesc  Prcdigt  luid  Predigampt :  the  Latin,  Jioc 
ministeruim.  If  the  Church,  according  to  this  testimony  of  the  Re- 
formers, is  built  upon  the  ministry — of  course  Christ  himself  being 
the  chief  corner  stone — how  can  the  ministry  be  developed  as  an 
office  out  of  the  Church  ?  Individual  ministers  may  spring  from 
the  bosom  of  the  Church,  and  maybe  recognized  and  authorized  by 
the  Church  to  exercise  their  office  in  the  midst  of  the  Church;  but 


THE    CALL   TO   THE    MINISTRY.  5T3 

the  office  itself  is  of  divine  appointment,  and  underlies  the  very  ex- 
istence of  the  Church."     [Quarterly  Review  vol.  vi.,  p.  409.) 

Still  another  of  these  half-truths  which  becloud  and  mislead  the 
minds  of  many,  and  which  serve  to  produce  the  view  that  to  the 
laity  as  well  as  to  the  ministry  belongs  the  right  to  give  the  minis- 
terial call,  is  the  plausible  sophism  that  the  ministry  is  the  servant 
of  the  Church,  and  that  the  Church,  in  the  very  nature  of  things, 
should  be  allowed  the  privilege  of  determining  who  shall  be  its  ser- 
vants in  the  ministry.  To  which  we  answer :  The  ministry  is,  in  a 
certain  sense,  the  servant  of  the  Church.  It  is  one  of  the  ascended 
Saviour's  gifts  to  the  Church,  for  the  edifying  of  the  Church.  "  For 
all  things  are  yours,  whether  Paul,  or  ApoUos,  or  Cephas."  (i  Cor. 
iii.  22  )  But,  in  the  highest  and  in  the  supreme  sense,  the  minister 
of  the  Gospel  is  not  the  servant  of  the  Church  at  all,  but  purely  and 
only  the  servant  of  Christ.  "  We  are  ambassadors  for  Christ" — 
"  Paul,  a  servant  oi  Jestis  Christ" — "If  I  yet  please  men  I  should 
not  be  the  servant  of  Christ" — "  The  gospel  which  was  preached  of 
me,  is  not  after  man,  for  I  neither  received  it  of  man,  neither  was  I 
taught  it,  but  by  the  revelation  oi  Jcsiis  Christ" — "  Take  heed,  there- 
fore, unto  yourselves  and  to  all  the  flock  over  the  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  hath  made  you  overseers ;"  texts  which  teach  that  the  minis- 
ter is  not  primarily  the  servant  of  the  Church,  but  the  servant  of 
Christ.  Besides,  this  sophism  that  the  ministry  are  the  servants  of 
the  Church,  assumes  that  the  laity  alone  constitute  the  Church  ; 
whereas  the  ministry  and  the  laity  together,  as  fellow  believers  in 
Christ,  constitute  it;  and  hence  the  action  of  the  ministry,  in  filling 
the  ministerial  office,  although  not  formally  authorized  by  the  laity 
to  do  so,  is  nevertheless  the  act  of  the  Church,  done  not  by  the 
whole  body  but  by  part  of  it,  namely  by  the  ministry,  whom  Christ 
as  Head  of  the  Church  has,  as  we  believe,  authorized  to  act  in  this 
respect  for  the  whole  Church,  as  her  representative  and  proper  or- 
gan of  official  conduct. 

(2)  But  we  derive  a  second  argument  against  granting  to  the  laity 
a  voice  in  determining  to  whom  the  call  to  the  ministry  shall  be 
given,  on  the  ground  of  their  evident  incapacity  rightly  to  discriminate 
and  judge  concerning  ministerial  qualifications.  W'e  are  well  aware 
that  to  assume  such  a  position  exposes  one  to  popular  censure,  and 
even  odium.  But,  whilst  aware  of  all  this,  we  still  prefer  to  be 
honest  and  frank  in  the  utterance  of  our  opinion.     For  the  piety  and 


514  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION.       " 

exalted  character  of  the  laity  of  our  Church  and  of  all  Protestant 
Churches,  we  have  a  most  profound  respect,  and  cherish  for  them 
as  brethren  in  Christ  a  most  fervent  Christian  affection.  For  the 
intelligence  and  sound  practical  sense  and  power  of  wise  judgment 
which  many  of  them,  scattered  here  and  there  through  our  Churches, 
possess,  we  also  cherish  a  very  high  opinion.  But  still,  taking  the 
laity  of  any  Church  as  a  body,  accepting  the  average  degree  of  in- 
telligence and  discrimination  which  they  possess,  we  have  no  hesita- 
tion to  declare  that  they  are  utterly  incompetent  rightly  to  judge 
and  decide  concerning  the  qualifications  requisite  on  the  part  of  a 
candidate  for  the  ministerial  office.  Of  course,  this  is  a  point  which 
cannot  be  well  determined  by  argument.  But  does  it,  we  may  ask, 
seem  reasonable  to  expect  that  the  lay  element  of  our  Churches 
would  be  competent  judges  in  the  case?  Are  not  the  qualifications 
required  for  admission  into  the  ministerial  office  such  as  in  the  very 
order  of  things,  or  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  would  lie  outside 
of  the  study  and  knowledge  of  almost  every  one  except  those  who 
are  themselves  in  the  office  of  the  ministry?  What  reason  have 
we  to  expect  that  laymen  as  a  body  have  the  ability  to  sit  as  wise 
and  discriminating  judges  of  a  candidate's  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
and  Hebrew  Scriptures,  of  the  Evidences  of  Christianity,  of  Natural 
and  Revealed  Theology,  of  Church  History,  of  Pastoral  Theology, 
of  the  Rules  of  Sermonizing,  and  of  Church  Government?  And 
even  in  regard  to  the  simple  and  practical  subject  of  the  candidate's 
personal  piety,  or  moral  and  spiritual  fitness  for  the  ministerial  office, 
how  many  of  our  laymen,  in  the  present  day,  are  imbued  with 
utterly  unscriptural  and  erroneous  conceptions  of  conversion  and  of 
the  new  life  of  Christ  in  the  soul,  unfitting  them  to  judge  correctly, 
even  in  this  respect,  of  a  man's  fitness  for  the  work.  Why,  in  every 
other  profession  and  department  of  trade  or  business,  are  those,  and 
those  only,  who  are  themselves  in  the  profession  or  trade  or  busi- 
ness, set  to  judge,  and  regarded  as  alone  competent  to  judge,  with 
regard  to  the  fitness  of  those  applying  for  admission,  whilst  for  ad- 
mission into  this  highest  of  all  professions,  requiring  the  most  special 
qualifications,  and  involving  the  highest  and  most  lasting  responsi- 
bilities, the  decision  of  the  case  is  to  be,  in  large  part,  submitted  to 
those  who  are  themselves  outside  of  the  profession,  and  who  make 
no  pretension  to  a  knowledge  of  many  or  any  of  its  requirements. 
Why  should  lawyers  alone  decide  who  shall  be  admitted  to  the  prac- 


THE    CALL   TO   THE    MINISTRY.  515 

tice  of  law,  and  physicians  alone  who  shall  enter  the  medical  pro- 
fession, and  military  men  alone  who  shall  be  enrolled  in  the  ranks 
of  the  military,  and  mechanics  alone  who  shall  be  received  into  the 
different  unions  or  orders  of  mechanics — those  in  each  profession,  and 
no  others,  weighing  the  qualifications  and  deciding  as  to  the  fitness 
of  those  who  apply  for  admission — and  yet  the  ministry  be  denied 
the  right  and  privilege  of  determining  who  shall  be  admitted  into 
the  office  of  the  ministry?  Why  should  this  be  pressed  as  an  ex- 
ception? Why  in  this  case,  and  in  this  case  alone,  should  those 
not  in  the  profession  be  made  judges  of  men's  fitness  for  the  profes- 
sion? The  demand,  upon  the  very  face  of  it,  bears  the  evidence  of 
its  own  unreason  and  impropriety,  and  merits  prompt  and  most  em- 
phatic refusal. 

If  the  lay  element  sent  up  to  our  synodical  assemblies  by  the 
churches  were  always  the  wisest  and  most  discerning  men  in  the 
churches,  selected  and  sent  because  of  their  superior  wisdom  and 
power  of  discernment,  our  opposition,  on  this  ground  of  incompe- 
tency, to  allowing  the  laity  a  voice  in  determining  to  whom  the 
ministerial  call  should  be  given,  would,  we  admit,  be  largely  modi- 
fied ;  although  even  then,  upon  other  grounds,  we  would  still  oppose 
it.  But  to  those  of  us  who  know  that  the  direct  reverse  is  the  case, 
that  men  are  thus  sent  without  any  regard  whatever  to  intelligence  or 
ability  for  their  mission,  but  often  simply  to  please  and  humor  them, 
or  because  they  often  are  the  only  ones  whom  the  pastor  can  secure 
to  accompany  him,  and  to  those  of  us  who  have  noted  the  appall- 
ing stupidity  and  mental  vacancy  of  many  of  the  laymen  who  make 
up  our  synodical  roll,  we  feel  that  it  would  be  a  most  fearful  viola- 
tion of  everything  sacred  and  right,  degrading  the  ministerial  office 
and  imperiling  the  interests  of  the  gospel  and  cause  of  Christ,  to 
accord  to  any  such  element  even  the  faintest  voice  in  determining  to 
whom  shall  be  given  the  call  to  the  high  and  holy  office  of  the  min- 
istry. And  hence,  not  by  ministers  and  laymen,  and  not  by  Synods, 
composed  of  the  latter  as  well  as  the  former,  but  by  ministers  07tly, 
assembled  purely  as  a  Ministerium,  should  the  Church  give  the  call 
to  the  ministerial  office! 

(3)  A  thi7-d  argument,  however,  against  granting  to  the  lay  ele- 
ment of  the  Church  any  part  whatever  in  determining  to  whom  the 
ministerial  call  should  be  given,  may  be  derived  from  the  fact  that 
this  is  the  judgment  and  practice  of  the  Protestant  Church  generally. 


51  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

In  itself  this,  of  course,  would  not  constitute  a  valid  argument;  for 
there  is  a  possibility,  although  by  no  means  a  probability,  that  in 
this  respect  the  general  judgment  and  practice  might  be  unscriptural 
and  erroneous.  But  it  still  has  some  force  as  an  argument,  and 
helps  to  confirm  what  other  arguments  serve  to  establish.  Instead, 
therefore,  of  abolishing  the  Ministerium,  as  the  organ  by  which  to 
examine  and  ordain  men  into  the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  entrust- 
ing such  examination  and  ordination  to  a  Synod  composed  of  laymen 
as  well  as  of  ministers,  as  has  been  claimed,  on  the  ground  that 
such  a  step  would  place  us  as  a  Church  "  in  an  attitude  of  desirable 
conformity  to  the  faith  and  usages  of  our  Protestant  brethren,'"  we 
find  that  by  doing  so  we  would  really  be  sundering  ourselves  from 
them,  and  would  be  departing  from  the  judgment  and  practice  of  the 
Church  general  in  this  respect.  Neither  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal, 
in  the  Presbyterian,  in  the  Congregational,  nor  in  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  do  laymen,  as  laymen,  have  either  voice  or  vote 
in  determining  who  shall  be  admitted  into  the  ministerial  office.  In 
all  these  large  and  intelligent  denominations,  the  ministry  alone 
rightly  determine  to  whom  the  ministerial  call  shall  be  given.  For, 
as  Dr.  Hodge  correctly  says,  "  It  is  a  principle  which  is  universally 
admitted  by  all  denominations  of  Christians,  except  the  Independ- 
ents, that  the  right  to  ordain  to  any  office  in  the  Church  belongs  to 
those  who  hold  that  office,  or  one  superior  to  it,  and  which  includes 
it."  And  again:  "If  then  it  is  admitted  that  ministers  and  ruling 
elders  hold  different  offices,  and  if,  as  has  been  clearly  shown  from 
the  constitution,  ordination  confers  office,  the  inference  seems  una- 
voidable that  those  only  who  hold  the  office  of  a  minister  of  the 
Gospel  can  confer  that  office  upon  others.  Presbyterians  deny  the 
right  of  ordination  to  the  civil  magistrate ;  they  deny  it,  under  ordi- 
nary circumstances,  to  the  people;  they  deny  it  to  any  who  have 
not  themselves  been  invested  with  the  office  conferred."  Again: 
"  Presbyterial  ordination  is  ordination  by  a  presbyter  or  presbyters, 
and  not  by  a  presbytery,  in  our  technical  sense  of  the  term.  This 
is  surely  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  only  doctrine  on 
which  we  can  hold  up  our  heads  in  the  presence  of  prelacy," 
{Church  Polity,  pp.  273,  275,  293). 

The  position,  then,  which  we  take,  in  thus  excluding  the  laity 
from  any  direct  part  in  the  admission  of  men  into  the  office  of  the 
ministry,  is  not  a  singular  one,  but  is  the  position  which,  for  good 


THE    CALL   TO   THE    MINISTRY.  517 

reasons,  has  been  adopted  by  a  number  of  the  largest  and  most  in- 
telligent denominations  which  to-day  compose  Protestant  Christen 
dom.     The  judgment  of  them  all  is  that  it  is  both  right  in  principle 
and  expedient  in  practice  that  those  only  who  are  themselves  in  the 
ministry  should  exercise  the  right  of  calling  others  into  the  ministry. 

(4)  A  foKi'tli  argument,  however,  in  favor  of  our  position,  that 
ministers  only  should  give  the  call  to  the  ministerial  office,  we  de- 
rive from  the  fact  that  this,  we  believe,  notwithstanding  all  that  has 
been  cited  and  written  to  the  contrary,  is  the  position  which  our 
Lutheran  Confessions  and  the  writings  of  our  greatest  Lutheran 
dogmaticians,  honestly  and  impartially  interpreted,  really  maintain. 

As  is  well  known,  there  are,  according  to  our  leading  Lutheran 
writers,  in  the  Church  three  estates  or  orders,  namely,  the  ecclesi- 
astical, the  political,  and  the  domestic,  or  the  Presbytery,  the  Mag- 
istracy, and  the  Laity,  to  each  of  which  three  estates  or  orders,  as 
part  of  the  Church,  belongs  some  share  in  the  provision  and  settle- 
ment of  pastors. 

Without  entering  into  any  discussion  of  the  correctness  of  this 
division  of  the  Church  into  these  three  estates,  and  of  this  conclu- 
sion that  to  each  thus  belongs  the  right  to  share  in  providing  the 
Church  with  a  ministry,  yet  one  thing  is  manifest,  namely,  that  our 
Lutheran  confessors  and  dogmaticians  had  clear  conceptions  of  what 
was,  in  the  calling  of  men  into  the  ministry,  the  proper  and  special 
part,  according  to  their  judgment,  of  each  of  these  three  estates; 
and  that,  according  to  their  judgment,  the  duty  of  examining  candi- 
dates for  the  ministry,  deciding  upon  their  qualifications,  and  then 
by  ordination  inducting  them  into  the  sacred  office,  was  purely  and 
only  the  work  of  the  first  of  these  three  estates  {Status  Ecclcsiasticus), 
or  the  ministry. 

This  Article  (XIV.)  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  whilst  very 
strongly  declaring  that  no  one  shall  perform  the  duties  of  the  min- 
isterial office  without  a  right  call  to  the  office,  does  not,  it  is  true, 
declare  by  whom  this  call  shall  be  given.  The  vocatio,  it  declares, 
is  necessary.  No  one  can  make  himself  a  member  of  the  estate  or 
ministerial  order.  It  must  be  done,  in  the  name  of  the  Church, 
by  others.  But  it  does  not  definitely  state  by  whom.  And  yet 
Melanchthon,  in  his  explanation  afterward  of  the  Article  in  the 
Apology,  indicates,  we  think,  clearly  by  whom,  in  his  judgment, 
this  call  to  the  ministry  by  ordination  should  be  given,  and  by 
.34 


5l8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

whom  only  it  should  be  given.  According  to  that  explanation  he 
was  willing,  if  only  it  was  recognized  as  merely  auctoritate  humana, 
to  abide  by  the  order  then  prevailing,  i.  e.  to  accord  to  the  Romish 
bishops  exclusively  the  right  of  ordaining  to  the  ministry,  thus  even 
depriving  the  ministry,  as  a  class,  of  the  right,  and  much  more,  of 
course,  depriving  the  laity  of  the  right.  The  addition,  also,  which 
he  afterward  makes  in  the  Variata,  in  the  words  "  sicut  et  Paul  us 
praecipit  Tito,  ut  in  civitatibus  Presbyteros  constituat,"  confirms  the 
view  that  the  "  rite  zwcatiis"  demanded  by  the  Fourteenth  Article  of 
the  Confession,  could,  according  to  Melanchthon's  opinion,  be  given 
only  by  the  ministry  or  by  those  themselves  in  the  order,  as  was 
Titus  to  whom  Paul  thus  gave  command  to  ordain  others  into  it. 
It  should,  also,  as  Bilmar  {Die  AugsbnrgiscJie  Confession  erkliirt  von 
A.  F.  C.  Bilmar,  p.  131)  well  says,  "be  noted  that  the  Confession, 
in  harmony  with  the  passage  from  the  preface  relating  thereto, 
assumes  the  words  *  Kirchen-regiment,'  or  '  Church  Government," 
and  '  Ordo'  to  be  synonymous,  thereby  unequivocally  excluding 
from  church  government  him  who  has  not  the  '  Ordo,'  i.  e.  laymen. 
Spiritual  things,  such  as  the  preaching  of  the  word,  the  administra- 
tion of  the  sacraments,  and  the  power  of  the  keys,  appertain  to 
the  Ordo  only,  and  to  no  one  else,  no  one  except  the  Ordo  having 
anything  to  say  in  regard  to  them." 

Article  XXVIII.  of  the  Confession  will  help  us  to  determine  what 
were  Melanchthon's  precise  views  upon  the  point  now  under  con- 
sideration. He  there  expresses  himself  distinctly.  "The  bishop's 
(z.  e.  minister's)  office,  according  to  divine  right,  is  therefore  to  preach 
the  Gospel,  to  remit  sins,  to  judge  of  doctrine,  etc."  But,  if  it  is 
thus  in  general  the  especial  duty  of  the  ministry  "to  judge  of  doc- 
trine," it  surely  also  is  "to  judge  of  the  doctrine"  as  held  by  those 
seeking  a  call  from  the  Church  to  preach. 

As  far,  therefore,  as  we  can  gather  from  the  Confession  itself,  or 
from  the  Apology,  the  confessors  designed  by  the  Fourteenth 
Article  of  the  Augustana  to  teach  that  the  call  to  the  office  of  the 
ministry  should  only  be  given  by  the  ministry.  And  if  the  ques- 
tion be  asked,  Why  did  they  not  clearly  state  that  this  was  their 
sense  of  it?  we  reply:  There  was  no  necessity  to  do  so.  "This  par- 
ticular point  was  not  in  dispute.  At  that  time  no  one  questioned 
the  right  and  propriety  of  candidates  for  the  ministry  being  exam- 
ined by  those  already  in  the  holy  office."  {Quarterly  Review,  vol. 
vi.,  p.  85). 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  519 

Upon  this  subject  of  the  call  to  the  ministry  Luther  has  written 
much,  and  not  always,  we  are  compelled  to  add,  with  as  much 
clearness  and  self  consistency  as  could  be  desired.  As  maybe  seen 
in  quotations  from  his  writings,  presented  in  preceding  parts  of  our 
lecture,  and  in  many  others  which  might  be  given,  especially  the 
well-known  language  of  the  Smalcald  Articles  bearing  upon  this 
point,  he  has  clearly  expressed  the  opinion  that  "churches,  i.  c.  local 
congregations,  possess  the  authority  to  call,  elect,  and  ordain  min- 
isters"— that  "  wherever  there  is  a  true  cJiiircJi,  there  is  also  the 
power  to  elect  and  ordain  ministers" — that  "the  true  church,  be- 
cause it  alone  possesses  a  priesthood,  must  also  have  power  to 
choose  and  ordain  ministers."  And  yet  in  the  interpretation  of  this 
language  of  Luther,  in  order  to  ascertain  precisely  what  his  views 
were,  we  mu.st  do  two  things.  We  must,  first,  grasp  clearly  the 
point  under  dispute  in  connection  with  which  he  uses  such  language. 
We  must  ask:  What  is  the  scope  or  aim  of  it?  To  any  one  who 
will  do  this  it  will  become  manifest  that  Luther,  in  the  use  of  such 
language,  always  employs  it,  not  to  assert  that  the  people  and  not 
the  ordained  ministry,  or  that  the  people  together  ivitJi  the  ordained 
ministry,  should  examine,  vote  upon,  and  ordain  men  into  the  office 
of  the  ministry,  for  that  is  never  the  point  disputed,  but  to  assert, 
over  against  the  hierarchical  claims  of  Rome,  that  the  people  and 
not  the  bishops  shall  have  the  right  to  determine  who  shall  be  their 
ministers  or  pastors.  "The  Reformers  were  protesting  against  the 
right  of  the  popes  and  bishops  to  deprive  the  churches  of  proper 
teachers  or  ministers,  and  arrogate  to  themselves  the  exclusive 
authority  to  make  and  appoint  priests  at  their  pleasure,  without  the 
consent  of  churches  and  regardless  of  their  welfare."  And  then  we 
must,  secondly,  remember  that  when  Luther  thus  asserts  the  right 
of  churches  to  give  the  call  to  the  office  of  the  ministry,  he  guards 
or  cautions  carefully  against  the  exercise  of  this  inherent  right 
except  in  case  of  necessity ;  and  he  "  reminds  those  who  would  per- 
vert his  teachings  that  he  has  said  such  things  only  of  extreme 
necessity!'  Bearing  these  two  things  steadily  in  mind,  even  Luther's 
strong  assertions,  seemingly  favoring  the  opposite  view,  can  all,  we 
believe,  be  harmonized  with  the  position  that  the  ordained  ministry 
alone  should  admit  men  into  the  ministry. 

What  the  testimony  of  the  leading  dogmaticians  of  our  Church  is 
upon  this  point  is  familiar  to  us  all.     Availing  mx^self  of  the  labors 


520  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  others,  I  cite  the  following  extracts  in  proof  of  the  position  for 
which  I  am  contending: 

Chemnitz,  L.  T.  {De  Ecclcsia,  iii.,  p.  123):  "It  is  certainly  and 
clearly  evident  both  from  the  commands  and  examples  of  Scripture 
(Tit.  i.  5  ;  I  Tim.  iv.  14 ;  2  Tim.  ii.  2  ;  Acts  xiv.  23)  that  tliosc  who  are 
already  in  the  ministry,  and  profess  the  sacred  doctrine,  should  be  em- 
ployed wJienever  through  a  mediate  call  the  mijtistry  is  entrusted  to  any 
one.  *  *  Therefore  the  election  and  call  of  ministers  of  the 
Church  should  not  be  submitted  either  to  the  ministers  alone,  or  to 
the  magistrates  alone,  or  to  the  ignorance  and  inconsiderateness  of 
the  promiscuous  multitude  alone." 

Gerhard,  L.  T.  [De  Min.  Eccl.,  §  85):  "That  bishops  and  pres- 
byters are  to  be  employed  when  the  ministry  is  to  be  entrusted  to 
any  one,  is  evident  from  the  apostolic  command  and  approved  ex- 
amples' ol  scripture.  The  same  is  confirmed  by  clear  reason.  For 
those  who  have  been  previously  engaged  in  the  ministry,  and  who 
profess  the  sound  doctrine,  can  judge  most  correctly  concerning  the 
qualifications  of  those  who  are  to  be  called  to  the  office  of  teaching." 

lb.  (86) :  "  Speaking  generally,  and  to  give  an  example,  we  may 
say  that  the  examination,  ordination,  and  inauguration  belong  to  the 
Presbytery ;  the  nomination,  presentation  and  confirmation  to  the 
Christian  Magistrate ;  and  the  consent,  vote  and  approval,  or,  ac- 
cording to  circumstances,  the  demand,  to  the  People.  Therefore  the 
general  principle  that  pastors  should  be  called  with  the  consent  of 
the  church,  or  that  no  one  should  be  obtruded  upon  the  church 
when  it  is  unwilling,  has  express  testimonies  in  scripture,  and  was 
approved  by  the  constant  practice  of  the  primitive  church  ;  but  the 
form  of  the  election  iji  specie  varies,  for  sometimes  the  vote  of  the 
people  was  necessary  in  nominating  persons,  and  sometimes  their 
approval  was  required  for  those  before  nominated."  (Acts  i.  15, 
23,  26 ;  vi.  3  ;  xiv.  23  ;  l  Cor.  xvi.  3  ;  2  Cor.  viii.  19 ;  I  Tim.  iii.  7  ; 
v.  22 ;  iv.  14.) 

Quenstedt,  T.  D.  P.  {De  Min.  Eccl.,  iii.,  402) :  "  Each  part  of  the 
church  has  its  own  functions  in  the  calling  of  ministers.  It  is  the 
office  of  the  clergy  to  examine  the  candidates  for  the  ministry,  to 
inquire  into  their  learning  and  life,  to  consider  and  judge  concerning 
the  gifts  necessary  for  the  ministry  of  the  church,  and  to  inaugurate 
them  by  the  laying  on  of  hands.  It  belongs  to  the  Christian  mag- 
istrate to  nominate  them,  to  present  them  when  called,  and  to  ratify 


»  THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  52 1 

their  examination.  The  duty  of  the  people  is  to  give  the  call,  to 
approve  by  their  vote  and  testimony,  and  to  elect." 

Hollazius  [Examen  De  Min.  Ecc,  q.  vii.,  Prob.  b.):  "The  call  of 
ministers,  generally  and  comprehensively  considered  (as  embracing 
election,  ordination  and  the  call  especially  so  called),  would  be  so 
attended  to  by  the  whole  Church,  and  all  its  three  orders,  that  due 
order  be  preserved  and  confusion  be  avoided.  Therefore  the  exam- 
ination, ordination  and  inauguration  belong  to  the  presbytery,  the 
nomination,  presentation  and  confirmation  to  the  Christian  magis- 
trate, and  the  consent,  vote  and  approval  to  the  people." 

Hunnius  (782) :  "  To  ministers  belongs  the  right  of  ordaining 
ministers." 

Now,  we  have  made  these  quotations  from  the  writings  of  our 
leading  dogmaticians  for  a  single  purpose,  \nz ,  to  show  that  what- 
ever part,  in  the  giving  of  the  ministerial  call,  they  may  assign  to 
the  magistracy  or  to  the  people,  the  part  of  examining,  ordaining 
and  inducting  into  the  office  they  unanimously  accord  alone  to  the 
ministry.  If  necessary  many  other  extracts  might  be  added  to  these 
which  we  have  thus  given,  making  this  point  clear  beyond  all  pos- 
sibility of  denial.  The  existence,  therefore,  of  a  Ministerinm,  by 
whom  alone  the  induction  of  men  into  the  ministerial  office  shall  be 
performed,  is,  we  believe,  thoroughly  Lutheran,  or  in  entire  harmony 
with  the  views  of  the  leading  Lutheran,  dogmatic  writers.  And 
with  such  an  arrangement,  even  under  our  own  American  republican 
form  of  government,  each  of  the  three  estates  or  orders,  according 
to  these  old  dogmaticians,  literally  exercises  its  proper  right  or  part 
in  the  giving  of  the  call.  The  magistracy,  instead  of  directly  exer- 
cising its  right,  delegates  the  exercise  of  it  to  the  other  two  estates 
or  orders.  The  ministry  examine  and  ordain  or  call  into  the  office  J 
and  the  people  elect  or  choose  their  own  pastors,  thus  confirming 
the  judgment  and  act  of  the  ministry.  And  thus,  in  this  related  and 
joint  act  of  the  state,  the  ministry  and  the  people,  the  Church,  which 
embraces  them  all,  gives  the  ministerial  call. 

(5)  A  final  argument,  however,  and  the  most  weighty  of  all,  in 
favor  of  our  position  that  to  the  ministry  alone  belongs  the  right  to 
give  the  call  to  the  ministry,  we  base  upon  the  fact  that  this,  we  be- 
lieve, is  the  position,  or  teaching,  of  the  zvord  of  God. 

Of  course,  the  very  question  in  dispute  is:  What  does  the  word 
of  God    teach  concerning   the  matter?     What  is,  according  to  the 


522  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Scriptures,  the  right  method  of  perpetuating  the  ministry?  What 
was  the  precise  order  of  procedure  in  the  induction  of  men  into  the 
ministerial  office  employed  by  the  apostles  and  the  primitive  Church? 
According  to  the  principles  and  practices  found  in  the  Bible,  is  the 
investment  of  men  with  ministerial  authority  the  act  properly  alone 
of  the  ministry,  or  is  it  the  joint  act  both  of  the  people  and  ministry? 
Or,  drawing  the  lines  still  closer,  even  where  it  is  evident  that  the 
act  of  inducting  into  the  sacred  office  was  performed  by  the  ministry 
alone,  was  it  thus  performed  by  power  and  authority  vested  in  them, 
as  the  incumbents  of  the  office,  by  Christ  the  Head  of  the  Church, 
or  was  it  performed  by  power  and  authority  delegated  to  them  by 
the  church,  as  the  act  of  the  church  whose  official  representatives 
they,  for  the  time  being,  were? 

To  these  questions,  by  men  equally  eminent  for  ability  and  piety, 
directly  opposite  conclusions  have  been  reached  and  opposite  an- 
swers have  been  given.  To  some,  viewing  the  question  in  the  light 
of  God's  word,  it  is  clear  that  the  ministry  alone,  by  divine  authority, 
and  to  the  entire  exclusion  of  the  laity,  possess  the  authority  to 
make  ministers  or  to  give  the  call  to  the  ministerial  office;  and  to 
others,  viewing  the  subject  in  the  same  light,  it  is  equally  clear  that 
the  true  call  to  the  ministry  is  the  act  of  the  Church,  embracing  both 
theministiy  and  the  laity,  and  hence  that  even  when  the  act  is  wholly 
performed  by  the  ministry,  it  is  yet  thus  performed,  not  as  the  sep- 
arate and  independent  act  of  the  ministry,  as  having  in  itself  by  di- 
vine authority  so  to  do,  but  as  the  act  of  the  Church,  having  in  itself 
divine  bestowal  the  authority  to  call,  but  delegating  to  the  ministry, 
because  of  its  greater  competency,  the  exercise  of  this  authority. 

The  Scriptures  therefore  do  not,  we  may  assume,  with  entire 
clearness,  and  beyond  room  for  controversy,  determine  by  whom 
precisely  this  call  to  the  ministry  is  to  be  given. 

Our  judgment,  however,  is  that  the  weight  of  Bible  testimony  is 
very  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  position  that  the  ministry  is  a  purely 
self-perpetuating  institution  in  the  Church;  being  itself  part  of  the 
Church  and  officially  representing  the  Church,  and  yet  deriving  its 
authority  not  from  the  Church,  but  from  Christ  the  divine  Head  of  the 
Church.  The  right,  therefore,  to  give  the  call  to  the  ministry  is  one 
which,  we  believe,  belongs  wholly  and  only  to  the  ministry,  and  this 
not  as  a  delegated  right  from  the  Church,  but  as  a  divinely  con- 
ferred right  from  Christ.     We  are  willing  to  adopt  as  our  own  the 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  523 

views  expressed  by  Lciehe  [Aphonsnien  iiber  die  Neii-tcstamentlicheji 
Acinpter,  p.  71):  "The  office  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  Church  hke 
a  fruitfid  tree  that  has  its  seed  in  itself.  As  long  as  the  examination 
and  ordination  remain  in  the  hands  of  the  presbyterium  or  pastors 
it  is  right,  and  can  be  maintained  that  it  completes  itself,  and  propa- 
gates itself  from  person  to  person  and  from  generation  to  genera- 
tion. Those  who  hold  it  pass  it  along,  and  he  to  whom  its  incum- 
bents transfer  it,  holds  it  as  from  God.  The  office  is  a  stream  of 
blessing  that  pours  itself  from  the  Apostles  upon  their  disciples,  and 
from  these  onward  into  future  times."  Or  we  accept  the  declaration 
of  Grabau  {Der  MissouriscJie  u.  lozvajiische  Gcist  unci  die  Lclire  der 
Lutherischen  Kirche,  p.  20)  :  "  As  Christ  is  the  only  Lord  and  ruler 
of  his  Church,  and  as  such  has  given  the  holy  ministry,  the  gospel 
and  the  sacraments,  and  has  thereby  established  for  himself  an  office 
of  the  ministry,  so  church  government  (kirchen-regiment)  does  not 
rest  upon  the  relinquishment  of  rights  or  upon  regulations  made  by 
the  multitude,  but  primarily  upon  the  faithful  service  of  the  pastors 
and  the  ministers  of  God's  word,  from  which  goes  forth  the  faith 
and  the  life  of  the  congregation." 

This  position  that  the  ministry  is  thus  a  self-perpetuating  office, 
and  is  such  by  divine  appointment  and  arrangement,  and  not  by  any 
delegated  authority  from  the  Church  to  the  ministry  to  act  in  its 
name  and  as  its  organ,  is,  we  believe,  thoroughly  in  accord  with  the 
teachings  of  the  word  of  God, 

Our  blessed  Saviour,  shortly  before  his  ascension  into  heaven,  in- 
stituted, in  a  formal  and  authoritative  manner,  the  apostolic  office. 
In  the  C(Mnmission  which  he  then  gave  the  eleven,  he  said:  "All 
power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye  therefore, 
and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you :  and,  lo,  I  am  with  you 
alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  or  end  of  the  "age,"  i,  e., 
of  this  present  dispensation  or  Christian  age:  eut  ttj- awTEMa(r  tov a'Mvo-- 
Looking  at  this  commission  we  find  that  its  duties  consisted  of  the 
following  three  particulars:  /laer/rcheh',  jSaKridetv,  and  Si6daKeiv,  i.  e.  i.  To 
disciple  all  nations,  or  convert  them  to  the  faith  ;  2.  To  initiate  them 
into  the  Church  by  baptism  ;  and  3.  To  instruct  them,  when  bap- 
tized, in  the  doctrines  and  duties  of  a  Christian  life.  [Bloouijield,  in 
loc) 


524  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

But  this,  as  we  all  know,  is  substantially  the  work  also  of  the 
ministry.  Essentially,  therefore,  the  apostolic  office  and  the  minis- 
terial office  are  the  same  office.  The  apostles,  in  certain  well  defined 
gifts  and  duties,  necessary  and  devolving  upon  them  in  their  especial 
work  of  founding  or  planting  the  Church,  of  course  stand  alone  and 
have,  as  we  have  already  said,  no  successors.  But  in  so  far  as  the 
special  duties  are  concerned  which  their  commission,  which  was 
their  call  to  the  office,  details,  and  which  the  Saviour  laid  upon  them 
as  their  official  life-work,  they  have  legitimate  and  true  successors 
in  the  gospel  ministry.  The  functions  to  be  performed  both  by  the 
apostles  and  by  the  ministry  are  in  substance,  or  in  their  essential 
character,  the  same,  and  hence  the  office  in  both  is  essentially  also 
the  same.     [Ev.  Rev.,  vol.  xi.,  p.  320). 

A  further  examination,  however,  of  this  apostolic  commission,  re- 
veals the  additional  fact  that  it  was  not  addressed  by  the  Saviour  to 
the  apostles  simply  as  individuals,  to  be  limited  to  them,  and  to  ter- 
minate with  them,  but  it  was  addressed  to  them,  as  the  inaimbents 
of  an  office,  which  was  to  continue  after  them,  and  which  was  to  take 
up  and  carry  on  the  work  which  they  thus,  under  the  Saviour's  com- 
mand and  direction,  began.  The  very  terms  of  the  commission  dis- 
close that  this  is  its  character.  "  He  commands,  in  the  first  place, 
to  go  into  all  the  world  ;  for  the  purpose,  in  the  second  place,  of 
preaching  the  Gospel  to  every  creature;  assured,  in  the  third  place, 
that  he  is  with  them  always,  and  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
Either  of  these  propositions,  or  all  of  them  together,  most  positively 
precludes  the  idea  that  this  language  of  the  Saviour  was  addressed 
to  the  Apostles  in  their  merely  individual  capacity ;  for  neither  did 
they,  nor  could  they  themselves  go  into  all  the  world,  preach  the 
gospel  to  every  creature,  and  unto  tlie  end  of  the  zvorld  be  assured 
that  Christ  was  with  them  in  authority  and  power."  {Ev.  Review, 
vol.  xi,,  p.  327.) 

And  yet  this  commission  thus  to  disciple  all  nations  by  baptizing 
and  by  teaching,  or  by  the  performance  of  fninisterial  functions,  is 
specifically  addressed  by  the  Saviour  to  tlicni,  the  Eleven,  and  not 
to  the  general  body  of  believers,  or  to  the  people  with  them  as  con- 
stituting together  the  Church. 

The  conclusion,  therefore,  it  appears  to  us,  is  inevitable  that  the 
words  of  the  commission  were  not  only  an  investiture  of  the  apos- 
tles with  divine  authority  themselves  to  enter  the  ministerial  office, 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MTNLSTRY.  525 

but  also  to  call  others  into  it ;  i.  e.  to  perpetuate  the  office,  so  that 
after  them  those  whom  they  had  chosen  and  ordained  as  their  suc- 
cessors might  carry  on  the  work  which  they  had  thus  begun.  They 
themselves,  by  the  very  terms  of  the  commission,  were,  without  the 
co-operation  of  the  general  body  of  believers,  authorized  by  the 
Saviour  both  to  be  ministers  and  to  call  or  make  ministers.  As 
Prof  Worley  expresses  it ;  "  The  only  logical  deduction  that  can 
be  made  from  the  passage  (Matt,  xxviii.  16-20)  is  that  it  was  ad- 
dressed to  the  Eleven  as  those  from  whom,  until  the  end  of  time, 
yet  under  Christ,  in  themselves  and  in  those  to  whom  they  com- 
mitted the  authority  by  the  will  of  Christ,  the  office  of  preaching 
should  go  forth,  bearing  in  its  hands  the  gracious  blessing  of  salva- 
tion to  the  whole  perishing  world,  and  until  the  Church  militant  is 
completely  taken  up  into  the  Church  triumphant."  Ev.  Reviezv, 
vol.  xi.,  p.  328.) 

And  this  deduction,  as  the  same  writer  further  shows,  is  con- 
firmed by  the  entire  subsequent  practice  or  acts  of  the  Apostles. 
Instead  of  referring  the  appointment  of  ministers,  either  wholly  or 
in  part,  to  the  people,  or  to  the  whole  congregation  of  believers, 
they,  there  is  clear  proof,  at  least  in  many,  if  not  in  all  instances,  as- 
sumed the  authority  thus  to  appoint  all  to  themselves,  thus  showing 
that  they  had  in  their  commission  been  invested  by  the  Saviour 
with  such  authority,  "  that  Christ  inte?ided  it  so  to  be,  viz. :  that  the 
authorization  of  public  teachers  in  the  Church  should  proceed  from 
those  whom  he  had  appointed  already  to  the  office." 

In  evidence  of  this  let  us  examine  some  of  the  passages  bearing 
upon  the  subject. 

Take  first  the  passage  found  in  Acts  xiv.  23,  referring  to  the  or- 
dination of  elders  by  Paul  and  Barnabas  in  the  churches  which  they 
had  founded  and  were  then  revisiting  and  confirming  in  the  faith. 
"And  when  they  had  ordained  them  elders  in  every  church,  and  had 
prayed  with  fasting,  they  commended  them  to  the  Lord  on  whom 

they  believed."       XeipoTovr/aavreg  6i  avrolg  7rpEa,3vTepovc  /car'  inKlrjaiav,  I.  C.  they 

appointed  or  placed  over  these  churches  elders  or  pastors  who  might 
lead  and  direct  them — not  one  elder  in  each  church,  but  several 
elders  in  each  :  -Kftea^vTepovz.  XeipoToveti>  signifies  :  to  raise  the  hands  ; 
to  vote,  elect,  by  stretching  out  the  hands.  The  expression  has  by 
some  therefore  been  taken  to  mean  that  these  elders  were  elected  or 
chosen  first  by  the  vote  of  the  people,  expressed  by  the  uplifting  of 


526  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  hand,  and  that  this  election  thus  expressed  was  then  afterward 
ratified  by  the  apostles  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  or  ordination. 
This  is  the  view  of  the  passage  taken  by  Chemnitz:  "  Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas," he  says,  "  ordained  elders  in  every  church  established  by 
them.  But  they  did  not  assume  the  right  and  authority  exclu- 
sively of  electing  and  installing  pastors  ;  but  Luke  uses  the  word 
X^ipoTon^aavTe^,  whicli  (2  Cor.  viii.  19)  is  used  concerning  the  election 
which  took  place  by  the  vote  of  the  congregation;  the  same  being 
taken  from  a  Greek  usage,  giving  their  votes  by  stretching  forth  the 
hand,  and  signifies  the  investing  of  some  one  with  the  office  by  votes, 
to  designate  him  or  give  their  consent."  But,  as  Bloomfield  (in  loco) 
has  said,  this  sense  of  the  passage  "  requires  a  very  strained  inter- 
pretation to  be  put  on  ;^EtpoTovrfaavTt:g,  and  one  moreover  which  is  for- 
bidden by  the  aurovc  following."  And  he  adds:  "There  is,  indeed, 
no  point  on  which  the  most  learned  have  been  so  much  agreed  as 
this,  that  xf^'poTovr^aag  here  simply  denotes  "  having  selected,  constituted, 
appointed.  See  Hammon,  Whitby,  Wolf,  and  especially  Kuinoel." 
And  Olshausen  says:  "  The  expression  in  verse  23  is  a  peculiar  one, 
X^ipoTovijcavTEQ,  avToig  Trpea^vTEpovc,  electing  for  tJicin  eldcrsT  "  It  does  not," 
he  adds,  "  permit  us  to  suppose  there  was  a  free  choice  on  the  part 
of  the  church,  but  intimates  that  the  Apostles  themselves  sought  out 
the  parties  qualified  for  office."  This  ordaining  of  elders  or  pastors 
by  Paul  and  Barnabas  was  then,  we  hold,  according  to  the  natural 
and  grammatical  sense  of  the  text,  the  act  of  the  Apostles  them- 
selves, and  does  not  include  in  any  way  the  active  participation  of 
the  congregation.  We  may  suppose,  of  course,  that  the  congrega- 
tion fully  acquiesced  in  the  choice  and  ordination  which  the  apostles 
thus  made,  and  heartily  and  gladly  accepted  those  thus  ordained  as 
their  pastors;  but  there  is,  we  maintain,  no  basis  whatever  in  the  text 
for  the  inference  that  the  congregation  first  chose  them  as  pastors, 
or  by  election  gave  them  the  ministerial  call,  and  that  the  apostles 
then  afterward  simply  by  ordination  confirmed  or  ratified  that  call. 
But,  take  next  the  passages  (2  Tim.  i.  6;  i  Tim.  iv.  14)  which  re- 
fer to  the  ordination  or  induction  into  the  ministerial  office  of  Tim- 
othy, and  it  already  appears  that  not  the  people,  but  the  ministry 
performed  the  act.  In  Paul's  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  (i.  6),  he 
puts  him  in  remembrance  to  "stir  up  the  gift  of  God  which  is  in 
him  by  the  putting  on  of  Paul's  hands,"  and  therefore  also  com- 
mands him  to  "hold  fast  the  form  of  sound'  words"  which  he  had 


THE    CALL   TO   THE    MINISTRY.  527 

heard  of  Paul,  thus  showing  that  Paul,  by  virtue  of  the  grace  given 
him  of  the  Lord  Jesus  in  bestowing  upon  him  the  office  of  an  apos- 
tle, had  also  instructed  Timothy  and  had  appointed  him  to  the  holy 
office.  And  that  Paul,  in  thus  ordaining  Timothy  to  the  ministerial 
office,  had  not  acted  alone,  nor  with  the  consent  or  suffrage  or  co- 
operation of  any  congregation,  but  in  ministerium,  or  along  with 
other  teachers  and  pastors  or  fellow  presbyters,  is  evident  from  the 
language  (i  Tim.  iv.  14),  where  he  writes:  "  Neglect  not  the  gift  that 
is  in  thee,  which  was  given  thee  by  prophecy,  with  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  the  Presbytery^  ToS  Trpsa^vreplov  .■  "  the  eldership  of  that 
district  to  which  Timothy  belonged  laid  hands  on  him,"  says  Wies- 
inger.  "  Confraternity  of  Presbyters,  at  the  place  where  Timothy 
was  ordained  (perhaps  Lystra)  who,  conjointly  with  the  apostle,  laid 
their  hands  on  him,"  says  Ellicott  in  loc.  Wholly  and  only  by  the 
ministry,  then,  was  Timothy  examined,  chosen,  ordained,  or  inducted 
into  the  ministry. 

Look  now,  in  the  next  place,  at  the  directions  which  Paul  gives 
both  to  Timothy  and  to  Titus  with  regard  to  the  ordination  of  men 
to  the  ministry,  and  the  position  for  which  we  are  contending  be- 
comes yet  more  manifest.  From  the  directions  thus  given,  two 
things  are  evident,  viz.:  first  that  the  apostles  authorized  those  whom 
they  ordained  to  ordain  others,  and  thus  perpetuate  the  ministerial 
office,  and  secondly,  that  they  alone  were  thus  authorized  to  ordain. 
Paul  writes  to  Titus:  "For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou 
shouldest  set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders 
in  every  city  ('one  in  one  city,  many  in  many' — Bp.  Taylor — ■- 
quoted  by  EUicott  in  loe.)  as  I  had  appointed  thee."  How  absolutely 
individual  is  not  here  the  apostolic  direction  and  authorization! 
How  free  from  even  the  faintest  intimation  of  such  a  thing  as  "the 
voice  of  the  congregation,"  or  "  ordaining  by  the  consent  or  order 
or  authority  of  the  congregation !  "  To  Titus  personally  was  the 
apostolic  authority  accorded,  and  by  him  personally,  governed  by 
his  own  judgment  in  each  case,  was  that  apostolic  authority  also  to 
be  exercised.  To  Timothy  the  Apostle  gives  in  substance  the  same 
directions:  "Thou,  therefore,  my  son,  be  strong  in  the  grace  that  is 
in  Christ  Jesus;  and  the  things  that  thou  hast  heard  of  me  among 
many  witnesses,  the  same  commit  thou  to  faithful  men,  who  shall  be 
able  to  teach  others  also."  (2  Tim.  ii.  1-2.)  And  again  (i  Tim.  v. 
22)  he  solemnly  charges  him :  "  Lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man," 


528  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

i.  e.,  that  he  should  not  ordain  any  man  to  the  ministerial  office  with 
undue  haste,  or  without  first  becoming  thoroughly  acquainted  with 
him,  and  well  assured  of  his  entire  fitness  for  it.  And  here  again 
the  authority  to  admit  to  the  ministerial  office,  as  in  the  directions 
to  Titus,  is  entirely  personal.  Timothy,  as  an  ordained  minister, 
has  full  authority  given  him  to  ordain  others  ;  and  there  is  again  not 
the  slightest  intimation  that  this  authority  is  to  be  exercised  only  in 
connection  with  or  at  the  request  of  some  congregation !  And 
"when  to  all  this  we  add  the  fact  that,  in  connection  with  these 
directions  'thus  to  set  apart  teachers,  as  he  himself  had  set  them 
apart,  Paul  gives  both  to  Timothy  and  Titus  the  particular 
qualifications  which  they  are  to  look  for  in  proper  candidates  for 
the  holy  office,  and  commands  them  to  use  great  circumspection  in 
the  exercise  of  this  right,  we  have  the  strongest  scriptural  assur- 
ance as  to  what  construction  the  Apostles  placed  upon  the  authority 
with  which  Christ  invested  them  and  the  course  which  they  took 
in  its  exercise."     {Ev.  Review,  vol.  xi.,  p.  329.) 

But  there  are  other  passages  which  are  often  cited,  and  which,  we 
are  told,  clearly  prove  that  ordination  or  the  call  to  the  ministry 
was  not  thus  the  independent  and  exclusive  act  alone  of  the  ministry, 
but  was  the  joint  act  of  the  ministry  and  the  laity,  or  the  act  of  the 
whole  Church.  The  people,  we  are  told,  gave  the  call  by  electing 
whom  they  would  as  their  pastors,  and  this  congregational  choice 
was  then  subsequently  confirmed  in  the  ordination  by  the  ministry 
of  those  whom  the  people  or  congregation  had  thus  called:  i.  e.  that 
the  people  had  a  voice  or  vote,  and  indeed  a  very  controlling  one,  in 
determining  who  should  be  admitted  to  the  ministerial  office,  or  to 
whom  the  ministerial  call  should  be  given. 

The  passage,  e.  g.,  in  Acts  vi :  2—3,  is  often  thus  cited.  We  confess, 
however,  with  all  possible  respect  for  the  judgment  of  those  who 
thus  cite  it,  that  we  are  unable  to  discover  the  least  pertinency  or 
relevancy  in  it  to  the  question  at  issue.  The  election  of  those  seven 
men  to  serve  as  officers  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem  was  a  purely 
congregational  matter,  and,  of  course,  the  members  of  the  congre- 
gation were  entitled  to  a  voice  in  its  determination.  They  were 
laymen  before  they  were  thus  chosen  and  set  apart  as  deacons,  and 
they  were,  so  far  as  that  affected  them,  equally  laymen  afterzvareis. 
Several  of  them,  it  is  true,  did  subsequently  become  preachers  of 
the  Gospel,  or  incumbents  of  the  ministerial  office,  but  they  did  not 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  529 

become  such  by  this  election  and  ordination.  In  this  transaction, 
in  which,  it  is  freely  admitted,  the  people  elected  and  the  apostles 
then  appointed  or  set  apart  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  they  were 
merely  elected  and  set  apart  to  attend  to  a  certain  expressed  and 
well  defined  congregational  or  local  work,  viz.  to  administer  rightly 
what  is  called  '"  tJie  daily  ministration','  \.o '' serve  tables','  to  take 
charge,  as  we  read,  of  ''this  business."  The  passage  therefore,  we 
hold,  is  utterly  irrelevant  to  the  point  at  issue,  and  hence  proves 
really  nothing  either  way  with  regard  to  the  question  whether  the 
people,  in  apostolic  days,  had  a  voice  in  determining  to  whom  the 
ministerial  call  should  be  given. 

Another  of  the  passages  constantly  cited  by  the  advocates  of  the 
right  of  the  laity  to  take  part  in  the  bestowal  of  the  ministerial  call 
in  favor  of  their  position,  is  the  passage  Acts  xv.,  containing  the  re- 
cord of  the  Council  or  Synod  which  was  held  at  Jerusalem  to  adjust 
or  determine  the  question  whether  circumcision,  under  the  Christian 
dispensation,  was  a  condition  of  salvation,  which  had  been  referred 
to  it  by  the  church  at  Antioch.  Laymen,  we  are  confidently  told, 
"  were  present  at  this  first  ecclesiastical  council,  and  took  an  active 
part  in  all  its  proceedings  ;  "  and,  on  the  assumption  that  all  this  was, 
beyond  a  doubt,  really  so,  we  are  further  and  frequently  told  that 
thus  also  should  it  now  and  always,  in  all  ecclesiastical  conventions, 
be,  and  especially  in  all  those  in  which  the  Church  determines  so 
important  a  matter  as  the  matter  to  whom  the  call  to  the  office  of 
the  ministry  should  be  given.  But  here  again,  as  in  the  preceding 
citation,  there  are  a  number  of  things  unproved  and  merely  assumed, 
upon  which  however  the  entire  argument  is  founded,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  which  the  whole  conclusion  is  therefore  invalidated.  What 
real  proof,  e.  g.,  is  there  that  ''  the  certain  otJier  cf  them"  who  are 
mentioned  as  coming  up  with  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Jerusalem,  were 
lay  delegates  from  the  church  at  Antioch?  What  real  proof  is  there 
that  a  single  layman  uttered  a  word  or  cast  a  ballot  in  the  council 
or  synod?  What  real  proof  indeed  is  there  even  of  the  presence  of 
a  lajnian  in  the  council  or  synod,  in  an  official  capacity,  or  as  con- 
stituting an  official  and  authoritative  part  of  the  council  or  synod? 
We  are  bold  to  say  that  not  one  of  these  things  can,  from  the  passage, 
be  clearly  and  satisfactorily  prove)i.  To  us  it  is  evident  diat  the 
only  parties  actively  participating  were  the  commissioners  Paul  and 
Barnabas  and  the  "  certain  other  of  them,"  most  probably  elders  or 


530  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

ministers  from  Antioch,  and  the  elders  and  apostles  at  Jerusalem, 
These,  we  believe,  were  the  only  active  participants  in  the  proceed- 
ings. Paul  and  Barnabas  were  sent,  not  to  confer  with  the  multi- 
tude, but  to  confer  with  "  tJie  apostles  and  elders  about  this  question ;" 
and  we  read  (v.  6)  "  and  the  apostles  and  ciders  came  together  for  to 
consider  of  this  matter."  And  whilst  the  sessions  were  evidently 
open  to  the  congregation,  and  large  numbers  of  the  people  were 
present  (v.  12),  and  whilst  after  the  deliberations  and  decisions  it  is 
said,  "  then  pleased  it  the  apostles  and  elders,  tvith  the  zvhole  chnrch, 
to  send  chosen  men  of  their  own  company  to  Antioch  with  Paul 
and  Barnabas,"  and  whilst  we  also  read:  "the  apostles  and  elders 
and  bretlireii  send  greeting  unto  the  brethren,"  still  there  is  no  proof 
that  others  than  apostles  and  elders  actually  participated,  and  what 
is  spoken  of  as  thus  having  been  the  pleasure  and  message  of"  the 
whole  church"  and  of  "the  brethren,"  may  all  be  harmonized  with 
what  precedes  upon  the  assumption  that  the  apostles  and  elders 
acted  in  the  case,  so  far  as  the  church  was  concerned,  representa- 
tively, i.  e.  in  the  name  of  the  church.  "The  whole  plea,"  writes 
another,  "  of  the  lay  participation  turns  on  the  terms  "  the  whole 
church,''  and  "  brethren!'  In  regard  to  the  first  of  these  terms  it 
occurs  in  connection  with  their  resolving  to  send  chosen  men  to 
accompany  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Antioch,  and  the  other  is  rendered 
doubtful  by  the  reading  of  the  best  manuscripts.  The  famous  Codex 
Sinaiticus  is  against  the  term  "  brethren"  as  referring  to  persons 
separate  from  the  apostles  and  elders.  In  this  view  Alford  concurs. 
We  have,  then,  little  more  than  the  shadow  of  a  shadow  of  any  ac- 
tive participation  of  the  laity  in  this  so-called  synod,  and,  if  they  did 
have  any  participation,  it  still  has  no  bearing  on  the  question  at  is- 
sue. For  it  was  a  question,  not  of  the  ministry,  but  one  affecting 
every  member  of  the  Church,  and  in  which  every  lay  member  had 
direct  and  personal  interest."  (^Qnarterly  Reviezv,  vol.  iii.,  p.  102.) 
But  the  locus  classicus  with  those  who  regard  the  laity  as  entitled 
to  participation  in  the  admission  of  men  to  the  office  of  the  ministry, 
is  the  record  (Acts  i.  15-26)  of  the  election  and  ordination  of  an 
apostle  to  take  the  place  of  Judas  who,  "  by  transgression,  fell,  that 
he  might  go  to  his  own  place."  "  Here,"  we  are  told  with  an  air  of 
triumph,  "  we  have  even  the  choice  of  an  apostle  by  the  multitude 
of  the  disciples,  the  whole  church  participating;  and  a  fortiori,  \{ 
the  laity  thus  had  part  in  the  election  or  choice  of  an  apostle,  should 
they  not  now  have  the  same  in  the  call  to  the  office  of  the  ministry  ? 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINLSTRV.  53 1 

This  choice  of  a  successor  to  Judas,  upon  which  they  lean  so 
heavily  for  support  of  their  position,  will  not,  we  are  satisfied,  if  it 
is  carefully  and  impartially  considered,  furnish  them  even  the  least 
reliable  and  satisfactory  support.  In  the  first  place,  the  validity  of 
the  whole  proceeding  may  very  properly  be  questioned.  The  fact 
that  of  Matthias,  thus  elected  to  the  apostleship,  no  further  record 
whatever  exists  in  scripture;  the  fact  that  this  election  took  place 
before  the  special  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  for  which  the  apostles  had  been  commanded  by  Christ  to 
wait,  thus  making  this  a  hasty  act,  performed,  if  not  against  the  com- 
mand of  Christ,  yet  at  least  without  it;  the  fact  that  Christ  him- 
self afterward  chose  Paul  as  one  of  his  inspired  apostles;  and  the  fact 
that  in  the  Apocalypse  (xxi.  14,)  only  tzvelve  apostles  are  spoken  of, 
in  harmony  with  the  original  number  constituting  the  apostolic 
college;  all  these  facts  make  it  more  than  probable  that  this 
entire  transaction  was  unauthorized,  unapproved,  and  invalid.  But 
admitting  for  the  sake  of  argument  its  validity,  we  deny,  in  the 
second  place,  that  there  is  proof  in  the  record  that  there  really 
was,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  any  such  thing  as  an 
election  by  the  suffrage  of  the  assembled  multitude.  For  pos- 
sibly, as  Dr.  J.  Addison  Alexander  suggests,  the  persons  thus 
assembled  did  not  vote  at  all;  and,  if  there  really  was  voting, 
there  is  nothing  in  the  record  to  indicate  certainly  by  whom  it  was 
done.  Peter,  it  should  be  noted,  in  his  address  {IVorley)  upon  the 
occasion,  does  not  call  upon  the  whole  company  to  take  part  in  the 
choice,  but  merely  announces  to  them  the  necessity,  in  accordance 
with  prophecy,  that  such  choice  be  made;  and  the  language  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  narrative  is  such  that  it  cannot  be  said  beyond 
question  to  include  all  present  in  the  vote  or  lot  which  was  cast. 
"  It  has  been  disputed,"  says  Alexander,  "  whether  it  was  only  the 
Eleven  or  the  whole  assembly  that  gave  forth  their  lots.  The  very 
question  assumes,  either  that  this  was  an  election,  in  the  ordinary 
sense  of  the  expression,  or  that  lots  means  votes  or  ballots,  which  is 
entirely  at  variance  with  the  usage  of  the  word,  and  with  the  cir- 
cumstances of  this  case.  This  makes  it  wholly  unimportant  who 
performed  the  mere  external  act  of  drawing,  shaking,  or  the  like." 
i^Couwtetitary  on  Acts  in  loco) 

Our  judgment  of  the  transaction  is  that  it  took  place  in  the//r.y- 
ence  of  the  congregation  or  disciples,  but  was  not  in  any  way  per- 


532  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

formed  by  them ;  that  the  apostle  addressed  them  as  he  did,  not  to 
invite  and  prepare  them  to  take  part  in  it,  but  to  explain  to  them  and 
prepare  them  to  witness  what  the  apostles  were  then  and  there  about 
to  do;  that  the  apostles  themselves,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  could 
alone  know  who  "  had  companied  with  them  all  the  time  that  the 
Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out  among  them,  beginning  with  the  bap- 
tism of  John,  unto  that  same  day  that  he  was*taken  up  from  them," 
and  that  the  apostles  themselves,  therefore,  and  not  the  multitude, 
appointed  or  selected  two,  meeting  these  conditions,  and  that  tJicy 
after  prayer,  gave  forth  or  cast  lots,  thus  leaving  it  to  the  Lord  to 
show  "  whether  of  these  two  he  had  chosen  to  be  a  witness  with 
them  of  his  resurrection."  We  incline,  indeed,  to  the  opinion  that 
the  "  hundred  and  tzvcnty"  or  those  designated  by  the  general  terms 
"disciples','  in  whose  presence  this  choice  of  an  apostle  thus  took 
place,  were  not  the  members  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem  at  all,  but 
were  the  seventy  evangelists,  and  others  representing  the  disciples 
or  Church  of  Christ  from  all  parts  of  the  land,  who  were  then,  dur- 
ing the  season  of  Pentecost,  present  in  Jerusalem,  and  could  easily 
thus  be  assembled  together;  so  that,  whilst  there  were  yet  no  organ- 
ized churches  which  they  represented,  or  of  which  they  were  pas- 
tors, they  still,  in  fact,  were  the  representatives  or  pastors  of  the 
unorganized  body  of  believers  in  various  places.  But,  whether  this 
be  so  or  not,  of  this  we  feel  certain,  that  there  is  no  evidence  in  the 
record  to  justify  the  opinion  that  the  multitude  present,  whoever  they 
may  have  been,  took  any  direct  part  in  the  transaction  whatever, 
much  less  that  they  actively  participated,  and  by  their  ballots  or 
votes  decided  that  Matthias,  and  not  Joseph  called  Barsabas,  should 
be  the  successor  of  Judas.  And  hence  we  are  also  clear  that  no 
argument  can  justly  be  drawn  from  this  transaction  of  thus  electing 
an  apostle  to  take  the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas,  in  favor  of  now 
allowing  those  not  themselves  in  the  office  of  the  gospel  ministry 
to  assist  in  deciding  who  shall  be  admntted  into  it. 

Reviewing,  then,  all  that  we  have  now  said,  under  this  examina- 
tion of  the  various  scripture  texts  bearing  upon  the  subject,  the  ar- 
gument appears  to  us  conclusive,  beyond  room  for  doubt,  that  the 
word  of  God  clearly  teaches  that  ministers,  and  ministers  only, 
should  decide  who  shall  be  ministers;  or,  in  other  words,  that  to  the 
ministry  only  is  granted  the  divine  authority  and  right  to  give,  in 
the  name  of  the  Church,  the  call  to  the  ministerial  office. 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  533 

But,  we  proceed  now  to  ask  and  answer  our  third  and  last  ques- 
tion, viz.: 

Uliat  is  the  precise  import  or  cliaractcr  of  the  act  of  ordination  by 
ivJiich  men  arc  th?/s  inducted  into  the  nnnisterial  office ? 

There  are  three  aspects  in  which  ordination  may  be  considered, 
namely:  what  it  is  in  itself,  what  it  is  as  the  act  of  the  Church,  and 
what  it  is  as  the  act  of  the  applicant  or  person  receiving  ordination. 
Let  us  look  at  it  briefly  in  each  of  these  aspects. 

Ordination,  considered  merely  as  a  visible  or  external  rite,  consists 
in  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  ministry,  accompanied  with 
prayer,  by  which  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer  the  recipient  is 
placed  in  the  ministerial  office  and  is  clothed  by  the  Church  with 
authority  to  perform  in  her  midst  ministerial  functions. 

The  ceremony  of  the  laying  on  of  hands,  always  employed  by  the 
Church  in  the  ordination  of  men  to' the  ministerial  office,  dates  back 
as  a  ritual  of  induction  into  sacred  positions  and  offices,  even  to  the 
earliest  ecclesiastical  ages.  Joshua,  e.  g.,  was  thus  inducted,  by 
special  divine  command,  into  the  office  to  which  he  was  called. 
(Numb,  xxvii.  18.)  Thus  also  were  the  seven  deacons  set  apart  to 
their  offices.  (Acts  vi:  6.)  Thus  also  were  Paul  and  Barnabas  set 
apart  to  their  special  missionary  labors  among  the  Gentiles.  (Acts 
xiii.  3).  So  also  in  the  ordination  of  Timothy,  (i  Tim.  iv.'  14;  2 
Tim.  i.  6.)  The  Apostle  Paul  also  bids  Timothy  "  lay  hands  sud- 
denly on  no  man"  (i  Tim.  v:  22),  showing  that  "when  he  wrote 
these  words  they  had  become  a  well  known  expression  for  ordainino- 
to  a  sacred  office..  And  this  mode  continued  to  be  used  in  the 
Post-Apostolic  Church,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  directions  and  forms 
of  prayer  for  ordinations  in  what  are  called  the  apostolic  constitu- 
tions."    [Jacob's  Eccles.  Polity  of  the  Neiv  Testament,  ^^.  1 10.) 

Whatever,  then,  we  may  regard  the  real  import  or  content  of 
ordination  to  be,  this,  at  least,  is  clear,  namely  that,  as  a  ceremony, 
consisting  of  prayer  and  the  laying  on  of  hands,  it  possesses  divine 
approbation  if  not  positive  divine  institution,  and  it  comes  down  to 
us  clothed  with  the  authority  and  endowment  not  only  of  apostolic 
practice,  but  also  of  the  continuous  and  unbroken  practice  of  the 
Church  during  all  the  successive  centuries  since. 

But  what,  let  us  now  ask,  is  the  import  or  the  content  of  ordina- 
tion, as  a  rite  of  induction  into  the  ministerial  office  ?  What  is  it, 
not  as  a  mere  external  ceremony,  but  in  its  spiritual  or  supernatural 
35 


534  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

and  divine  elements?  What  character  precisely  does  it  possess?  Is 
it  only  a  ceremony,  or  is  it  a  ceremony  in  connection  with  which 
there  are  imparted  spiritual  gifts  and  graces?  In  a  word,  does  or- 
dination secure  or  give  anything  in  .  the  way  of  endowment  or 
qualification  for  the  ofifice  of  the  ministry  from  the  Holy  Ghost? 

What  the  Romish  theory  concerning  the  essential  character  of 
ordination  is,  we  have  already  seen.  She  esteems  it  as  the  highest 
and  greatest  of  the  sacraments,  "  sacramentum  ordinis ; "  that  sac- 
rament by  which  men  are  fitted  and  endowed  with  power  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  administer  rightly  all  the  other  sacraments.  "  Prop- 
ter ordinem,"  says  Thomas  Aquinas,  "fit  homo  dispensator  aliorum 
sacramentorum,  ergo  ordo  habet  magis  rationem,  quod  sit  sacra- 
mentum, quam  alia." 

The  Greek  Church  takes  the  same  view  as  does  the  Romish  con- 
cerning it,  declaring  that  "  Orders  are  a  sacrament,  in  which  the 
Holy  Ghost,  by  the  laying  on  of  the  bishop's  hands,  ordains  them 
that  be  rightly  chosen  to  minister  sacraments,  and  to  feed  the  flock 
of  Christ."     {Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  ii.,  p.  501.) 

That  ordination  is  thus  a  sacrament,  in  the  strict  and  correct  sense 
of  the  word,  or  in  the  same  sense  in  which  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  are  sacraments,  all  Protestants  heartily  deny;  although,  in 
a  certain  wide  and  untechnical  sense,  our  Lutheran  confessors  and 
dogmaticians  were  willing  that  it  should  be  so  called  or  designated. 
(Vide  Apology,  vii.,  11.     Gerhard,  xii.,  b.  147). 

But,  whilst  this  Romish  conception  of  ordination,  as  truly  a  sac- 
rament, is  undoubtedly  an  entirely  extreme  one,  and  involves  a  gross 
misapprehension  of  the  ministerial  office,  and  is  therefore  very  pro- 
perly rejected  by  all  Protestant  Churches  and  creeds,  the  question 
may  still  be  asked  whether  many  Protestants  themselves,  in  their 
intense  opposition  to  everything  that  partakes  of  a  hierarchical  prin- 
ciple, have  not  swung  off  into  an  opposite  extreme,  and,  by  making 
little  or  nothing  of  ordination,  have  also,  perhaps,  like  the  Roman- 
ists, missed  the  exact  truth. 

The  views,  e.  g.,  of  Luther  and  of  our  earlier  Lutheran  dogmati- 
cians, which  assign  to  election  by  the  congregation  the  call  to  the 
ministry,  and  which  logically  therefore  regard  ordination  as  not 
really  necessary,  and  as  being  merely  a  solemn  and  impressive  way 
of  recognizing  or  publicly  declaring  that  the  person  ordained  has 
been  called,  and  is  by  the  call  which  he  has  already  received  already 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MIMSTKY.  535 

also  in  the  ministerial  office,  are  certainly,  in  our  judgment,  thus 
extreme  and  utterly  untenable  when  dispassionately  considered  in 
the  light  of  God's  word.  We  may  not  perhaps  be  able  to  determine 
and  express  what  precisely  is  conferred  in  this  ordination  service  by 
which  men  are  inducted  into  the  ministry,  but  this  much  to  our 
mind  is  clear,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  does  confer  spiritual  gifts  and 
graces  of  some  kind  and  some  degree;  in  other  words,  that  whilst 
not  in  the  Romish  sense  a  sacrament,  lifting  the  recipient  up  into  an 
hierarchical  order,  and  divinely  imparting  to  him  priestly  and  mir- 
aculous power  or  supernatural  endownments  which  he  did  not  be- 
fore possess,  and  which  are  indelible  and  can  never  be  lost,  yet  also 
is  it  not  in  the  extreme  Protestant  sense  a  mere  ceremony,  impart- 
ing as  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  no  benediction,  and  leaving  the 
spiritual  character  and  qualifications  of  the  person  ordained  the  same 
in  all  respects  as  though  he  had  not  been  ordained.  This  latter  view 
is  also,  we  are  satisfied,  equally  with  the  former,  an  unscriptural  ex- 
treme. In  proof  that  ordination  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  and 
prayer  is  more  than  only  an  empty  rite,  and  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
does  in  connection  with  it  impart  spiritual  blessings  to  the  person 
ordained,  we  turn  to  the  word  of  God. 

It  is  simply  a  fact  that  in  every  instance  recorded  in  the  Bible  of 
the  imposition  of  hands,  or  the  extension  of  hands,  accompanied 
with  prayer,  the  supposition  or  assumption  on  the  part  of  all  con- 
cerned was,  not  that  the  act  was  merely  an  impressive  human  ritual, 
but  that  there  was  also  something,  either  good  or  bad,  either  bane 
or  benediction,  actually  and  really  imparted.  "  Imposition  of  hands," 
says  the  Rev.  Frederick  Mej'rick,  M.  A.  [Smith's  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  vol.  ii.,  p.  242),  "  is  a  natural  form  by  which  benediction  has 
been  expressed  in  all  ages  and  among  all  people.  It  is  the  act  of 
one  superior,  either  by  age  or  spiritual  position,  towards  an  inferior, 
and  by  its  very  form  it  appears  to  bestow  .some  gift,  or  to  manifest  a 
desire  that  some  gift  should  be  bestowed.  It  may  be  an  evil  thing 
that  is  symbolically  bestowed,  as  when  guiltiness  was  thus  trans- 
ferred by  the  high  priest  to  the  scape-goat  from  the  congregation 
(Lev.  xvi.  21) ;  but  in  general  the  gift  is  something  good  which  God 
is  supposed  to  bestow  by  the  channel  of  the  laying  on  of  hands. 
Thus,  in  the  Old  Testament,  Jacob  accompanies  his  blessing  to 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh  with  imposition  of  hands  (Gen.  xlviii.  14); 
Joshua  is  ordained  in  the  room  of  Moses   by  imposition   of  hands 


536  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

(Numb,  xxvii.  i8;  Deut.  xxxiv.  9);  cures  seem  to  have  been 
wrought  by  the  prophets  by  the  imposition  of  hands  (2  Kings  v. 
1 1) ;  and  the  high  priest  giving  his  solemn  benediction  stretched  out 
his  hands  over  the  people  (Lev.  ix.  22).  The  same  form  was  used 
by  our  Lord  in  blessing,  and  occasionally  in  healing,  and  it  was 
plainly  regarded  by  the  Jews  as  customary  or  befitting  (Matt,  xix, 
13;  Mark  viii.  23;  x.  i6j.  One  of  the  promises  also,  at  the  end  of 
St.  Mark's  Gospel,  to  Christ's  followers,  is  that  they  should  cure  the 
sick  by  laying  on  of  hands  (Mark  xvi.  18);  and  accordingly  we  find 
that  Saul  received  his  sight  (Acts  ix.  17),  and  Publius' father  was 
healed  of  his  fever  (Acts  xxviii.  8)  by  imposition  of  hands." 

Tracing,  then,  the  history  of  the  laying  on  of  hands,  as  we  find  it 
recorded  in  the  Scriptures,  there  was  evidently,  all  along  in  its  his- 
tory, the  supposition  or  belief  that  there  was,  through  or  by  it,  an 
actual  impartaiion  of  something,  a  going  forth  or  communication  of 
either  positive  blessing  or  curse,  a  production  of  some  real  and  true 
result. 

In  further  confirmation  of  this,  and  especially  in  connection  with 
the  laying  on  of  hands  as  part  of  the  ceremony  of  induction  into 
the  ministerial  office,  let  us  examine  carefully  the  precise  sense  of 
several  texts  bearing  directly  upon  the  subject. 

Let  us  examine,  first,  the  text  (Numb,  xxvii.  18)  in  which  Moses 
is  commanded  to  ordain  Joshua  as  his  successor.  "  And  the  Lord 
said  unto  Moses,  Take  thee  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  in  whom  is  the 
spirit,  and  lay  thine  hand  upon  him."  By  some  it  is  maintained 
that  here  there  could  evidently  have  been  no  communication  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  since  it  is  explicitly  asserted 
that  Joshua  already  possessed  the  Spirit,  and  because  of  his  posses- 
sion of  him  he  was  thus  selected  and  ordained.  "  In  whom  is  the 
spirit."  Thus  one  writer  [McClintock  and  Strotig,  vol.  iv.,  p.  58) 
says :  "  Here  it  is  obvious  that  the  laying  on  of  hands  did  neither 
originate  nor  communicate  divine  gifts,  for  Joshua  had  'the  spirit' 
before  he  received  imposition  of  hands." 

But,  in  opposition  to  this  interpretation  of  the  text,  we  deny 
that  the  Hebrew  word  Riiach  here  signifies  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
one  of  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity,  or  that  there  is  any  reference 
whatever  in  the  use  of  the  term  to  any  supernatural  or  gracious 
work  wrought  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  character  of  Joshua.  The 
term   evidently  has   reference   only  to  the  riatural  endowments  of 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  537 

Joshua,  the  spirit  of  prudence,  of  courage,  of  energ}',  of  force  and 
decision  of  character  which  he  was  endowed  with,  and  which  natu- 
rally fitted  him  for  the  leadership  of  the  people.  "  Understanding," 
— "  insight" — "courage" — are  the  meanings  given  of  the  word,  as 
it  here  stands  in  this  text,  by  Fuerst  in  his  Hebrew  and  Chaldee 
Lexicon.  Hence  the  expression  "  in  whom  is  the  spirit,"  does  not 
mean  "  in  whom  is  the  Holy  Spirit','  but  simply  that  in  him  was  a 
natural  spirit,  or  natural  elements  of  character,  fitting  him,  when 
once  quickened  and  directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  supplemented 
by  still  other  and  higher  gifts  and  graces,  to  be  the  leader  of  the 
Israelitish  nation.  In  his  ordination,  by  the  laying  on  of  Moses' 
hands,  the  Holy  Spirit  added  to  these  natural  elements  of  character, 
or  this  natural  spirit,  such  other  spiritual  elements  and  power  as 
might  still  be  needed  in  order  entirely  to  qualify  him  for  the  right 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  his  position.  Or,  as  Bush  {in  loco) 
remarks  :  "  By  this  ceremony  of  the  imposition  of  hands  was  sig- 
nified the  transfer  of  the  office  of  leader  of  Israel  from  Moses  to 
Joshua,  and  the  communication  of  the  requisite  spiritual  gifts  and 
endowments  for  its  right  discharge  ; "  corresponding  with  what  is 
plainly  taught  in  the  parallel  passage  (Deut.  xxxiv.  9) :  "And  Joshua 
the  son  of  Nun  was  full  of  the  spirit  of  wisdom,  for  Moses  had 
laid  his  hand  upon  him." 

But,  in  further  confirmation  of  this  truth  that  in  the  laying  on  of 
hands  in  ordination  there  is  an  actual  communication,  to  the  person 
ordained,  of  a  spiritual  gift  or  power  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  of  some 
character,  let  us  examine  the  two  passages  in  Paul's  letters  to  Tim- 
othy upon  the  subject.  "  Neglect  not  the  gift  (u;)  huD^i  rov  h  aul 
xapiafiaTog)  that  is  in  thee,  which  was  given  (o  h'iuOri  aoi)  thee  by  proph- 
ecy with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,"  (i  Tim.  iv. 
14).  "  Wherefore,  I  put  thee  in  remembrance  that  thou  stir  up  the 
gift  of  God  which  is  in  thee   by  the  putting   on   of  my  hands  {m  ijv 

aiTiav  afafit/ivr/OKU  ae  ava^ijKvpelv  t6  ,^;d/3((T^a  Toi)  Oeoi),  b  iariv  tv  aol  tha  T^g  eTTidiaeug 

ruv  xeipiiv  fiov).  The  word  x^pto/^a  which  in  both  these  texts  is  trans- 
lated "  gifts,"  and  which  in  each  designates  something  conferred  in 
or  through  the  laying  on  of  hands,  occurs,  says  Ellicott  (i  Tim.  iv. 
14)  "with  the  exception  of  i  Peter  iv.  19,  only  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
where  it  is  found  as  many  as  fourteen  times,  and  in  all  cases  denotes 
a  gift  emanating  from  the  Holy  Spirit  or  the  free  grace  of  God. 
Here  probably,  as  the  context  suggests,  it  principally  refers  to  the 


538  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

gifts  of  7ra/j«KA?/(7/f  and  (5«Jaff/(aAta  just  specified.  The  parallel  passage 
(2  Tim.  i.  6)  clearly  develops  the  force  of  the  preposition  (avaCyTrvpetv): 
the  xaptofja  is  as  a  spark  of  holy  fire  within  him  which  he  is  not  to 
let  die  out  from  want  of  attention."  Again:  "  The  emOemg  x^^p^^^  ^^ 
xeipodeala  was  a  Symbolic  action,  the  outward  sign  of  an  inward  com- 
munication of  the  Holy  Spirit  for  some  spiritual  office  (Acts  vi.  6), 
or  undertaking  (Acts  xiii.  3)  implied  or  expressed."  And  again  : 
"  Prophecy  and  imposition  of  hands  were  the  two  co-existent  circum- 
stances which  make  up  the  whole  process,  by  the  medium  of  which 
the  xapfy/^awas  imparted."  [Ellicott  on  i  Tim.  iv.  14.)  Bloomfield's 
comment  on  the  passage  (i  Tim.  iv.  14)  is  as  follows:  "  Notwith- 
standing that  this  must  chiefly  allude  to  the  spiritual  gifts  which 
Timothy  had  received,  it  may  include  the  ordinary  graces  of  the 
Spirit,  by  which  his  endowments  in  learning  would  be  sanctified. 
These  were  given  dm  ■jTpo(p7]TelaQ,  i.  e.  according  to  prophecy;  of  which 
the  passage  (i.  18)  is  the  best  commentary,"  prophecies  probably 
which  some  of  the  New  Testament  prophets  had  uttered  concern- 
ing Timothy  before  he  was  put  into  the  ministry.  The  com- 
ments of  Wiessinger  [Olshatcsen's  Coinnientary,  in  loc,  vol.  vi.,  p. 
113)  on  these  two  related  or  parallel  texts  (i  Tim.  iv.  14;  2  Tim.  i. 
6)  are  very  full,  and,  in  our  judgment,  very  judicious  and  correct. 
xdpia/ua,  he  says,  "denotes  the  gift  of  the  divine  Spirit,  that  gift 
which  qualifies  him  (Timothy)  for  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  for 
the  work  of  an  evangelist  (2  Tim.  iv.  5)  and  which  he  had  to  make 
use  of  at  present  in  the  service  of  a  particular  church.  On  the 
h  Got,  compare  2  Tim.  i.  6,  where  the  gift  is  represented  as  a  spark 
of  the  Spirit  lying  within  him,  the  kindling  of  which  depends  on 
the  will  of  him  on  whom  the  gift  is  bestowed.  So  here,  also, 
the  use  of  the  x^^p^f^f^^  i^  made  to  depend  on  the  will  of  Timothy. 
*  *  *  With  respect  to  the  laying  on  of  liands,  compare  Acts ;  xiii.  3, 
where  we  read  that  hands  were  laid  in  prayer  on  the  apostle  Paul 
and  on  Barnabas,  by  the  prophets  and  teachers  at  Antioch,  in  order 
to  separate  them/(?r  the  work  to  which  they  were  called,  Acts  vi.  6, 
where  we  read  that,  in  like  manner,  hands  were  laid  in  prayer  by  the 
apostles  on  the  newly  elected  deacons,  in  order  to  impart  to  them 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit  for  their  ministry.  It  is  in  every  case  an  appro- 
priation of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  in  prayer,  through  the  instrumentality 
of  others,  for  a  definite  object,  for  a  work  which  is  undertaken,  or  a 
service  which  is  entered  upon,  whether  this  service  be  marked  out 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINLSTRY.  539 

in  a  standing  office  or  not."  Again,  on  2  Tim.  i.  6,  he  remarks: 
"  But,  what  does  this  xap"^/^a  denote?  The  term  itself  in  its  wide 
signification  (Rom.  i.  1 1 ;  v.  15 ,  vi.  23 ;  ix.  29,  comp.  with  xii.  6. 
I  Cor.  xii.  4,  seq.)  leaves  it  undecided;  yet  we  may  perhaps  deter- 
mine it  from  the  connection,  as  verses  6  and  7  manifestly  introduce 
verse  8  seq.  {ovf)  and  from  the  comparison  of  i  Tim.  iv.  14,  and  i.  18. 
As  there  xapi(rfia  can  be  understood  only  of  his  definite  gift  for  the 
vocation  of  teacher,  so  also  here.  And  the  whole  tenor  of  the 
epistle  (to  which  verse  6  is,  as  it  were,  the  key)  points  to  Timothy's 
vocation  as  a  teacher,  not  to  his  Christian  deportment,  the  61  ijv  ahiav 
of  verse  6  in  fact,  assuming  his  faiih  as  ground  of  the  admonition 
to  fidelity  in  his  official  calling.  The  reference  is  not  to  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit  in  general,  but  to  the  specific  gift  requisite  for  his  calling; 
and  this  not,  with  Mack,  that  of  government,  but  that  of  evangelist. 
So  also  Olshausen.  The  relative  clause  'which  is  in  thee,'  etc., 
refers  to  the  same  act  as  in  i  Tim.  iv.  14,  viz.:  Timothy's  reception 
of  his  evangelical  calling  by  prophecy  and  imposition  of  hands. 
Regarding,  as  every  unprejudiced  person  must  do,  the  two  passages 
as  having  a  like  reference,  we  see  how  groundlessly  this  setting 
apart  is  regarded  as  a  consecration  of  Timothy  to  the  bishopric  of 
Ephesus,  a  formal  inauguration  to  the  office  of  priest  or  bishop. 
To  any  presiding  over  the  Ephesian  Church,  or  over  any  other 
Church,  there  is  here  not  the  slightest  allusion."  Dr.  Van  Oosterzee, 
on  the  first  of  these  texts  (i  Tim.  iv.  14),  remarks:  "At  his  entrance 
on  the  office  of  teacher,  Timothy  received  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  a 
special  gift  of  high  value  in  the  exercise  of  his  office.  The  office 
itself  is  not  here  denoted,  but  his  divine  qualification  for  the  office, 
which  was  given  through  (^d)  prophecy  with  the  laying  on  of  hands 
of  the  elders"  [Lange's  Com.  in  loco).  And  again,  on  2  Tim.  i.  6,  he 
remarks:  "The  Apostles  here,  as  i  Tim.  iv.  14,  alludes  to  the  gift 
of  the  calling  (Lehrberuf)  received  from  God,  and  addresses  Timothy 
not  as  a  Christian  simply,  but  chiefly  as  teacher." 

Bearing  in  mind  what  these  eminent  biblical  critics  thus  express, 
it  appears,  therefore,  to  us  clear  that  in  the  ordination  of  Timothy 
by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery,  of  which  the  apostle 
was  one,  there  was,  in  that  solemn  transaction,  communicated  to  him, 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  a  special  gift  or  x^px^fn,  above  what  he  before 
or  without  such  ordination  possessed,  not  sacramental  or  miraculous 
and  divine  power  such  as  Romanists  claim  that  ordination  confers, 


540  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

but  special  moral  or  spiritual  power,  with  special  regard  to  the  dis- 
tinctive work  of  a  religious  teacher  or  Christian  minister  and  pastor 
to  which  he  was  then  and  there  thus  consecrated ;  a  special  impar- 
tation  indeed  of  the  Holy  Ghost  himself,  by  which,  if  he  would  sub- 
sequently avail  himself  rightly  of  this  presence  and  offered  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  within  him,  the  natural  endowments  which  he  pos- 
sessed would  be  quickened  into  new  and  increasing  activity  and 
effectiveness,  and  his  utterance  of  the  truth  be  clothed  with  resistless 
power  over  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men.  In  a  word,  in  his 
ordination,  through  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery, 
the  Holy  Ghost  was  so  communicated  to  him  as.  in  all  respects,  to 
qualify  him  for  the  right  and  for  the  successful  exercise  of  the  func- 
tions of  the  ministerial  office. 

Nor  do  we  here,  for  a  moment,  in  thus  asserting  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  imparted  in  ordination  to  Timothy  by  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  the  presbytery,  attach  any  magical  or  ex  opere  operato 
power  to  the  mere  manual  or  tactual  act  itself  The  Holy  Ghost  is 
not  imparted  because  the  hands  of  the  presbytery  are  thus  imposed, 
nor  through  that  even  as  a  necessary  outward  and  material  medium, 
but  he  is  imparted,  we  still  hold,  in  connection  with  it,  and  as  God's 
answer  to  the  prayers  and  faith  in  the  promises  of  his  word  which 
his  Church  there  in  that  solemn  hour  pours  out  before  him. 

And  this  even  Gerhard  (xii.,  b.  i68),  although,  as  seems  to  us, 
quite  inconsistently,  admits.  "We  do  not  deny,"  is  his  language, 
"that,  in  ordination,  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  necessary  for  the 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  ministry  of  the  Church,  are  conferred 
and  increased  ;  yet  meanwhile,"  he  adds,  "  we  make  a  distinction 
between  the  grace  of  reconciliation,  or  of  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
the  grace  of  ordination,  since  many  receive  the  grace  of  ordination 
who  nevertheless  do  not  receive  the  grace  of  reconciliation;  sec- 
ondly, we  say  that  the  bestowal  and  increase  of  the  gifts  necessary 
for  the  ministry,  are  by  no  means  to  be  ascribed  to  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  as  a  sacramental  symbol  truly  so  called,  and  divinely  ap- 
pointed, but  to  the  prayers  of  the  Church  and  the  presbytery,  to 
which  the  promise  of  hearing  has  been  attached." 

But,  if  in  the  case  of  Timothy  there  was  such  impartation,  in  the 
act  of  ordination,  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  then  also,  we  have  every  rea- 
son to  think,  is  there  now  in  the  case  of  all  who,  possessing  the 
requisite  natural  gifts  and  Christian  character,  present  themselves  to 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINISTRY.  54 1 

the  ministerium  or  presbytery,  as  the  proper  official  organ  of  the 
Church,  and  at  their  hands  receive  ordination.  In  all  essential  re- 
spects, the  cases  are  the  same. 

We  like,  upon  this  whole  subject,  the  views  of  Martenscn  {Chris- 
tian Dogmatics,  sect.  272),  who  says  :  "  In  the  Lutheran  Church 
preachers  are  ordained  according  to  the  apostolic  method  by  laying 
on  of  the  hands  of  the  brethren — an  emblem  of  the  bestowment  of 
spiritual  gifts — yet  we  cannot  rank  priestly  orders  on  the  same 
footing  with  the  sacraments  properly  so  called,  and  we  cannot  sup- 
pose that  extraordinary  gifts  are  connected  therewith,  as  they  were 
in  the  apostles'  times.  And,  withal,  as  little  can  we  suppose  that 
ordination  is  a  mere  ceremony  in  which  nothing  is  conferred.  For 
the  office  appointed  by  the  Lord,  in  its  very  idea,  seems  to  include 
2i  potuer  ^nd  authority  from  the  Lord  himself,  and  must,  to  a  certain 
extent,  be  accompanied  with  the  promises  that  were  in  an  extraordi- 
nary manner  fulfilled  in  the  case  of  the  apostles  and  evangelists 
whom  our  Lord  sent  forth.  *  I  will  give  you,'  said  Christ,  '  a  mouth 
and  wisdom  which  all  your  adversaries  shall  not  be  able  to  gainsay 
nor  resist,'  (Luke  xxi.  15).  From  this  authority,  resting  in  the 
office  as  coming  from  the  Lord  himself,  appointing  the  preacher  as 
servant,  not  of  the  Church  only,  but  of  the  Lord,  is  developed  the 
special  priestly  gift  of  performing  the  service  for  the  building  up  of 
the  fellowship,  and  of  preaching  words  of  warning  and  of  comfort; 
a  gift  and  an  anointing  that  cannot  be  found  in  an  orderly  manner 
among  those  who  lack  that  authority,  because  they  possess  only  a 
subjective  or  human  call.  Although  the  Lutheran  Church  has  not 
ventured  to  propound  a  dogma  regarding  priestly  ordination,  owing 
to  a  certain  fear  of  the  hierarchical  principle,  the  faith  nevertheless 
exists  within  her  pale,  that  ordination  is  )uorc  than  a  mere  ceremony, 
as  it  is  also  the  express  witness  of  faithful  ministers,  that  they  have 
ever  derived  new  strength  and  energy  for  the  work  of  their  office 
in  their  ordination.  It  is  evident  that  the  gift  of  grace,  lying  hid  in 
the  office,  does  not  always  appear  in  power,  but  depends  for  its  ac- 
tivity upon  faith  and  continued  personal  and  ethical  endeavor.  '  Till 
I  come,  give  attendance  to  reading,  to  exhortation,  to  doctrine. 
Neglect  not  the  gift  that  is  in  thee,  which  was  given  thee  by  proph- 
ecy, with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery.'  What  is 
true  regarding  the  administration  of  the  sacrament,  that  it  must  be 
conditional  upon  the  inner  state  of  the  receiver,  holds  good  also  of 


542  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ordination.  It  must  be  given  to  him  only  who  possesses  the  inner 
preparation  and  the  due  quahfications  for  the  office,  and  hence  also 
Paul  warns  Timothy  not  to  lay  hands  suddenly  on  any  man." 

But,  apart  from  what  ordination  thus  is  in  itself,  it  may  also  be 
considered  as  the  act  of  the  CJuirch.  As  such  it  is,  first,  an  act  of 
recognition ;  in  which  the  Church  recognizes  and  acknowledges  the 
applicant  to  possess  the  required  scriptural  qualifications  for  the  of- 
fice of  the  ministry.  It  is,  secondly,  an  act  o{  committing  or  entrust- 
ing. The  Church  has  a  divine  mission;  she  has  precious  possess- 
ions and  interests;  she  has  solemn  and  blessed  means  of  grace. 
That  misssion  is  the  glory  of  Christ  in  the  sanctification  of  the 
Church  and  the  conversion  of  the  world.  Those  possessions  and 
interests  are  all  the  various  activities  and  institutions  by  which  she 
is  seeking  to  secure  and  promote  that  glory.  And  those  means  of 
grace  are  the  word  and  blessed  sacraments.  And  all  these,  in  the 
act  of  ordination,  the  Church  gives  over,  as  a  sacred  trust,  to  be 
cared  for  and  defended  and  helped,  in  every  possible  way,  by  him 
whom  she  thus  ordains.  The  divine  word  e.  g.,  she  gives  into  his 
hands,  and  bids  him  preach  it  in  its  purity  and  with  all  fidelity.  The 
holy  sacraments  she  entrusts  to  him  and  charges  him  rightly  to 
administer  them.  Her  history  she  gives  him  to  study,  to  be  inspired 
by,  and  to  respect;  her  polity  to  know,  esteem,  and  obey ;  her  pure 
doctrine  to  understand,  love,  and,  even  at  the  peril  of  his  life,  to  pro- 
claim and  defend;  her  institutions  of  learning  to  cherish  and  sup- 
port; her  literature  to  read  and  circulate;  her  system  and  schools 
of  education  to  sustain  and  improve;  her  cause  of  missions  and  the 
world's  evangelization  to  plead  and  pray  for;  all  these  interests, 
which  are  the  interests  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  the  Church,  and 
Christ  also  through  the  Church,  in  that  act  of  ordination,  give  over, 
as  their  solemn  trust,  to  him  whom  they  thus  induct  into  the  min- 
istry. Thus  Paul  wrote  to  Timothy  (2  Tim.  i.  14),  "That  good  thing 
which  was  committed  unto  thee,  keep  by  the  Holy  Ghost  which 
dwelleth  in  us;"  and  in  another  place:  "O  Timothy,  keep  that 
which  is  committed  to  thy  trust,  avoiding  profane  and  vain  bab- 
blings, and  oppositions  of  science  falsely  so  called:  which  some  pro- 
fessing, have  erred  concerning  the  faith  "(i  Tim.  vi.  20-21.)  But 
thirdly,  ordination,  as  the  act  of  the  Church,  is  an  act  also  oi  delega- 
tion and  spiritual  subjection.  She  delegates  to  him  authority  to  ex- 
ercise in  her  midst  the  functions  of  the  ministerial  office.     She  com- 


THE    CALL    TO    THE    MINISTRY.  543 

missions  him,  in  the  name  of  her  ascended  Lord,  to  preach  the 
word  and  to  administer  the  sacraments.  And  she  places  herself 
under  his  spiritual  tuition  and  rule,  recognizing  him  as  the  ambas- 
sador of  Christ,  and  pledging  herself  to  receive  from  his  mouth  and 
hands  the  word  and  sacraments  as  from  the  very  mouth  and 
hands  of  Christ  himself,  even  as  Christ  also  declares:  "He  that  re- 
ceiveth  you,  receiveth  me;  and  he  that  receiveth  me,  receiveth  him 
that  sent  me  "  (Matt.  x.  40) ;  or  as  the  apostle  declares  :  "  Now  then 
we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as  though  God  did  beseech  you  by 
us,  we  pray  you  in  Christ's  stead  be  ye  reconciled  to  God  "  (2  Cor.  v. 
20);  or,  as  he  writes  to  the  Hebrews  (xiii.  ly),''  Obey  them  that 
have  the  rule  over  you  and  submit  yourselves  ;  for  they  watch  for 
your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give  account,  that  they  may  do  it 
with  joy  and  not  with  grief;  for  that  is  unprofitable  for  you."  And 
hence,  while  ministers  are  not  a  separate  and  superior  oi'der,  and  are 
not  to  "  be  lord  over  God's  heritage','  (i  Peter  v.  3)  their  office  still 
invests  them  with  authority,  and  the  duty  of  the  Church  is  to  ac- 
knowledge and  submit  herself  obediently  to  that  authority,  in  so  far 
as  its  exercise  harmonizes  with  the  principles  of  the  word  of  God. 

But  ordination,  we  yet  remark,  may  also  be  considered  as  tJie  act 
of  the  person  receiving  it,  or  of  the  person  ordained.  As  such  it  is  a 
solemn  act  of  entire  consecration,  if  it  be  God's  will,  for  life,  to  the 
special  work  of  the  ministry.  Inwardly  moved  to  it  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  now  outwardly  called  to  it  by  the  voice  of  the  Church, 
he.  in  the  act  of  ordination,  devotes  himself,  in  most  solenui  cove- 
nant, henceforth,  with  all  his  time  and  power,  to  the  one  sublime 
work  of  promoting  the  glory  of  Christ  in  the  exercise  of  the  func- 
tions of  the  ministerial  office.  It  is  a  personal  consecration;  a  con- 
secration of  the  whole  man,  body,  mind,  soul ;  a  consecration  to  the 
one  single  but  grand  work  of  the  gospel  ministry;  a  consecration  to 
it  until  death.  Hence,  whilst  not  believing  in  any  priestly  "  cJiarac 
ter  indelibiiis"  imparted  in  ordination,  and  whilst  believing  that  de- 
mission of  the  ministerial  office  is  under  certain  circumstances  both 
justifiable  and  obligatory,  we  yet  hold  that  for  any  one,  with  suitable 
gifts,  once  ordained  to  the  ministry,  and  ph\'sically  and  mentally 
capable  to  discharge  its  duties,  for  the  mere  sake  of  gain  to  turn 
aside  and  engage  in  purely  secular  pursuits,  is  a  great  and  soul- 
endangering  sin.  And  yet  how  many  men  there  are  in  our  land 
to-day,  who,  while  still  retaining  the  official  prefix  of  "Reverend^' 


544  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

and  retaining  it  and  publishing  it  as  so  much  capital  in  trade,  al- 
though in  health  and  able,  were  their  hearts  right,  to  do  good 
work  for  Christ  in  the  ministry,  are  engaged  in  all  kinds  of  merely- 
secular  and  worldly  vocations ;  so  that  with  the  good  lay  brother 
out  West  the  whole  Church  may  to-day  well  pray  :  "  From  all  minis- 
terial land  speculators,  from  all  reverend  life-insurance  agents,  from 
all  clerical  pill-pedlers  and  patent  medicine  venders,  from  all  ordained 
storekeepers  and  agriculturists,  Good  Lord,  deliver  us!" 

And  sinful  also,  beyond  expression,  is  it  for  those  who  have  once, 
in  ordination,  solemnly  consecrated  themselves  to  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  forgetful  of  their  solemn  ordination  vows,  then  afterward 
with  only,  half  heart  and  with  but  feeble  devotion,  to  prosecute  that 
work.     So  morally  great  is  the  work  of  the  ministry  in  itself;  so 
solemn  are  the  promises  made  in  the  assumption  of  the  office;  so 
dependent  the  prosperity  of  the  Church  and  the  conversion  of  the 
world  upon  its  faithful  prosecution ;  so  responsible  for  the  loss  of 
immortal  souls  who  perish  through  ministerial  indifference  or  negli- 
gence;  so  capable,  with  God's  blessing  upon  the  preached  truth,  to 
reach  and  change  multitudes  into  the  image  of  Christ,  and  be  the 
means  of  bringing  them  to  the  enjoyment  of  Christ  and  heaven  for- 
ever ;  and  so  rapidly  hastening,  as  both  preacher  and  hearer  are,  to 
that  august  judgment  throne  where  we  shall  all  be  adjudged  guilty 
or  guiltless  of  the  blood  of  each  other's  souls;  oh,  how  earnest,  how 
entirely  consecrated  to  his  work,  how  fervent  and   unwearied  and 
burning  with  zeal ;  j^ea,  what  a  very  flame  of  holy  fire  should  every 
minister  of  the  gospel  be!     Of  Richard  Baxter  it  is  said:    "When 
he  spoke  of  weighty  soul  concerns,  you  might  find  his  very  spirit 
drenched  therein."     Paul  writes  to  the  Romans  :  "  I  say  the  truth  in 
Christ,  I  lie  not,  my  conscience  also  bearing  me  witness  in  the  Holy 
Ghost,    that  I  have   great  heaviness  and  continual   sorrow   in   my 
heart;  for  I  could  wish  that  myself  were  accursed  (separated)  from 
Christ  for  my  brethren,  my  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh."     And 
our  Saviour  himself,  unwavering  in  his  devotion  to  the  unselfish  and 
sublime  work  of  saving  souls  to  which  he  had  given  himself,  ex- 
claims; "  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  to  fin- 
ish his  work."     In  each  how  full,  how  entire,  the  consecration!  How 
steadfast  and  earnest  and  self-consuming  their  zeal !     How  true,  in 
all   things,  to   their  ministerial  call!     Oh,  that  all  who  preach  the 
word  had  such  a  spirit!     Oh,  that  all  who  bear  the  vessels  of  the 


THE    CALL   TO    THE    MINLSTRY,  545 

Lord  were  also  thus  entirely  consecrated  to  their  holy  and  blessed 
work ! 

In  now  closing  our  discussion  of  this  subject  of  the  Call  io  the 
Ministry,  we  know  of  no  more  fitting  thought  or  language  with 
which  to  do  so,  than  we  find  in  the  following  '' Si/spij-iitPi"  with 
which  Hollazius  {^De  Ministerio  Ecclesiastico)  concludes  his  able  dis- 
cussion of  the  same: 

"  Te,  Deus,  Pater  omnis  boni  ordinis,  Auctor  minsterii  sacri,  sin- 
ceris  humilliniisque  precibus  obtestor,  ut  Hierarchiam  tuam  Ecclesi- 
asticam,  quam  mortalium  commodo  sapientissime  instituisti,  adver- 
sus  fremitum  orbis  et  orci  integram  et  incorruptam  conserves !  Da 
ministris  tuis  plantantibus  et  rigantibus  incrementum  uberrimum! 
Da  etiam  mihi  ministro  tuo  infirmo  os  et  sapientiam  ;  confer  dona 
sanctificantia  ;  adde  animum  imperterritum  ;  largire  prosperos  officii 
successus,  ut  ad  praescriptum  verbi  tui  recte  doceam,  Sacramenta 
rite  dispensem,  pie  vivam,  et  ex  hac  vita  tanquam  ex  hospitio,  non 
tanquam  ex  donio,  Te  jubente,  placide  discedam." 


ARTICLE  XV. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES  IN 
THE  CHURCH. 

By  s.  a.  holman,  d.  d. 


THE   Fifteenth  Article  of  the  Augsburg    Confession   relates   to 
rites  and  ordinances  of  human  authority  in   the   Church.     The 
Latin,  German  and  English  texts  of  this  article  are  as  follows: 

XV.  De  Ritibus  Ecclesiasticis. 
De  ritibus  ecclesiasticis  decent,  quod  ritus  illi  servandi  sint,  qui  sine  peccato 
servari  possunt,  et  prosunt  ad  tranquillitatem  et  bonum  ordinem  in  ecclesia, 
sicut  certae  feriae,  festa  et  similia.  De  talibus  rebus  tamen  admonentur  hom- 
ines, ne  conscientiae  onerentur,  tanquam  talis  cultus  ad  salutem  neccessarius 
sit.  Admonentur  etiam,  quod  traditiones  humanae  institutae  ad  placandum 
Deum,  ad  promerendam  gratiam,  et  satisfaciendum  pro  peccatis  adversentur 
evangelic  et  doctrinae  fidei.  Quare  vota  et  traditiones  de  cibis  et  diebus,  etc., 
institutae  ad  promerendam  gratiam  et  satisfaciendum  pro  peccatis  inutiles  sint 
et  contra  evangelium.* 

XV,  Von  Kirchenordnungen. 
Von  Kirchenordnung,  von  Menschen  gemacht,  lehretman  diejenigen  halten, 
so  ohne  Siinde  mogen  gehalten  werden,  und  zu  Frieden,  und  zu  guter  Ordnung 
in  der  Kirchen  dienen,  als  gewisse  Feier,  Festa,  und  dergleichen.  Doch  ge- 
schieht  Unterricht  dabei,  dasz  man  die  Gewissen  nicht  damit  beschweren  soil, 
als  sei  soldi  Ding  nothig  zur  Seligkeit.  Dariiber  wird  gelehret,  dasz  alle  Sat- 
zungen  und  Tradition,  von  Menschen  dazu  gemacht,  dasz  man  dadurch  Gott 
versiihne,  und  Gnad  verdiene,  dem  Evangelio  und  der  Lehrevom  Glauben  an 
Christum  entgegen  seind ;  derhalben  sein  Klostergelubde  und  andere  Tradi- 
tion von  Unterschied  der  Speise,  Tag,  etc.,  dadurch  man  vermeint  Gnade  zu 
verdienen,  und  fiir  Sunde  gnug  zuthun,  untiichtig  und  wider  das  Evangelium.* 

*  Miiller,  Symbolischen  Bucher, 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  547 

XV.  Of  Ecclesiastical  Rites. 
Concerning  Ecclesiastical  Rites,  they  teach,  that  those  rites  are  to  be  ob- 
served which  may  be  observed  without  sin,  and  are  profitable  for  tranquillity 
and  good  order  in  the  Church  ;  such  as  are  set  holidays,  feasts  and  such  like. 
Yet  concerning  such  things,  men  are  to  be  admonished,  that  consciences  are 
not  to  be  burdened  as  if  such  service  were  necessary  to  salvation.  They  are 
also  to  be  admonished  that  human  traditions,  instituted  to  propitiate  God,  to 
merit  grace  and  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are  opposed  to  the  Gospel  and  the 
doctrine  of  faith.  Wherefore  vows  and  traditions  concernmg  foods  and  days 
and  such  like,  instituted  to  merit  grace  and  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are  use- 
less and  contrary  to  the  Gospel.* 

The  term  "  ecclesiastical  rites,"  is  employed  in  a  more  restricted 
sense  than  is  the  phrase  "Church  Ordinances  instituted  by  men," 
which  is  derived  from  the  German  text.  A  "  rite"  conveys  the  idea 
of  a  ceremonial  act,  an  "  ordinance,"  that  of  an  established  law  re- 
lating to  any  usage  or  opinion.  Hence  the  theme  and  the  scope 
of  the  present  lecture  may  be  indicated  by  the  title:  Hinnaii  Ordi- 
nances in  the  Cluircli. 

The  Divine  and  Human  Factors  in  the  Constitution  and  De- 
velopment OF  THE  Church. 

In  the  Seventh  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  it  is  taught 
that  the  Christian  Church  exists  and  develops  through  the  adminis- 
tration of  ordinances  which  are  of  divine  origin  and  obligation. 
"The  Church  is  the  congregation  of  saints,  in  which  the  gospel  is 
rightly  taught,  and  the  sacraments  rightly  administered."  Those 
who  appropriate  the  salvation  imparted  through  these  external 
means  of  grace  properly  constitute  the  Church,  although  "in  this 
life,  hypocrites  and  evil  persons  are  mingled  with  it."  Therefore 
the  primary  essential  factor  in  the  constitution  and  development  of 
the  Church,  is  the  grace  of  God,  operating  through  his  divinely 
appointed  means.  When  man  becomes  the  recipient  of  divine  grace 
he  is  called  to  labor  together  with  God  in  the  development  of  the 
Church.  Human  agency,  though  not  coordinate  with  the  divine,  is 
nevertheless  an  essential  factor.  As  in  the  sphere  of  providence, 
the  human  must  cooperate  with  the  divine,  so  in  the  sphere  of  divine 
grace  there  must  be  a  human  agency  to  work  together  with  God. 


*C.  P.  Krauth's  "Augsburg  Confession,  literally  translated  from  the  original 
Latin."    1868. 


548  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

As  the  divine  word  was  revealed  to  our  race,  not  immediately  to 
each  individual  soul,  but  "holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  so  now  it  is  necessary  that  man  should 
administer  the  means  of  grace  which  God  provides,  in  order  that 
the  Church  may  exist  and  develop  on  earth.  The  service  of  man  in 
mediating  salvation  through  the  Church,  includes  not  only  the 
administration  of  the  objective  means  of  grace;  it  likewise  requires 
the  manifestation  of  his  own  subjective  views,  and  the  exercise  of 
his  own  finite  powers.  Man,  originally  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
that  he  might  reflect  the  character  and  the  work  of  his  Creator,  lost, 
in  his  fall,  the  ability  to  realize  the  great  end  of  his  existence;  but 
under  the  Gospel  he  is  enabled  to  "put  on  the  new  man,  which  is 
renewed  in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him," 
and  thus  regenerated  he  finds  the  highest  and  noblest  exercise  of 
his  intellect,  sensibilities  and  will,  in  the  development  of  the  visible 
Church.  God  has  thus  put  man  into  a  garden  of  greater  glory  and 
value  than  Eden,  "  to  dress  it  and  to  keep  it." 

Necessity  of  Human  Ordinances. 

The  necessity  and  the  sphere  of  human  ordinances  in  the  Church, 
especially  appear  in  the  consideration  that  the  end  of  the  ceremonial 
usages  of  the  Old  Testament,  respecting  persons,  things,  places  and 
times,  having  been  fulfilled  by  the  advent  and  atonement  of  Christ, 
those  ordinances  are  no  longer  necessary  nor  binding  upon  the 
Church.  The  dispersion  of  the  Jews,  and  the  destruction  of  their 
temple,  where  it  was  necessary  to  administer  many  of  their  cere- 
monial laws,  indicate  this  fact;  but  it  is  expressly  taught  in  scrip- 
ture that  "  the  first  covenant  had  ordinances  of  divine  service  and  a 
worldly  sanctuary;  but  Christ  being  come,  an  High  Priest  of  good 
things  to  come,  by  a  greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  obtained 
eternal  redemption,"  Heb.  ix.  i,  ii,  12.  To  the  Christians  at  Col- 
osse,  who  were  perplexed  by  the  opinion  of  some  that  the  Church 
was  yet  bound  by  the  ceremonial  laws  of  Moses,  the  apostle  writes: 
"Let  no  man  judge  you  in  meat  or  drink,"  cf  Lev.  vii.  10-27;  x. 
9;  Num.  vi.  3  ;  "or  in  respect  of  a  holy  day,  or  of  the  new  moon, 
or  of  sabbaths,  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come,  but  the  body 
is  of  Christ,"  Col.  ii.  16.  The  restrictions  upon  the  freedom  of  hu- 
man agency,  under  the  Old  Testament,  were  required  by  the  typical 
character  of  the  covenant  and  the  low  attainments  of  the  chosen 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  549 

people  in  their  apprehension  of  the  divine  plan  of  salvation.  The 
ceremonial  ordinances  of  the  Old  Testament,  like  its  moral  laws, 
were  designed  as  a  schoolmaster  to  lead  to  Christ.  If  numerous 
specific  usages  and  ceremonial  laws  had  been  divinely  ordained  in 
the  New  Testament,  as  they  were  in  the  Old,  the  fundamental  doc- 
trine of  the  sufficiency  of  the  atonement  of  Christ  would  be  greatly 
obscured.  But  the  abrogation  of  the  ceremonial  usages  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  the  absence  of  divinely  ordained  rites  and 
usages  for  the  regulation  of  worship,  government  or  discipline,  in- 
the  New  Testament,  necessarily  require  the  exercise  of  the  sub- 
jective powers  of  man.  All  organizations  must  have  modes  of  ex- 
istence and  forms  of  development.  Hence  those  who  constitute  the 
visible  Church,  are  not  only  at  liberty  but  under  obligation  to  or- 
dain such  rites  and  usages,  as  are  necessary  to  formulate  its  wor- 
ship, to  constitute  and  administer  its  government,  and  to  establish 
its  doctrines.  A  preliminary  principle  in  the  Formula  of  Govern- 
ment and  Discipline  of  the  General  Synod  is  that  "as  Jesus  Christ 
has  left  no  entire  specific  form  of  government  and  discipline  for  his 
Church,  it  is  the  duty  of  every  individual  church  to  adopt  such  re- 
gulations as  appear  to  it  most  consistent  with  the  spirit  and  precepts 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  best  calculated  to  subserve  the  interests 
of  the  Church  of  Christ,"  ch.  i,  sec.  5.  This  principle  illustrates 
the  doctrine  which  is  expressed  in  the  first  clause  of  the  Fifteenth 
Article  of  the  Confession,  viz. :  that  "ecclesiastical  rites  are  to  be 
observed."  The  liberty  and  obligation  of  the  Church  are  indeed 
subject  to  the  higher  law  of  the  divine  word,  which  -restricts  the 
sphere  of  the  human  agency  to  the  institution  of  such  ordinances  as 
"  may  be  observed  without  sin,  and  are  profitable  for  tranquillity 
and  good  order  in  the  Church."  The  Apology  of  the  Confession 
(VIII.)  says,  "  Our  adversaries  agree  to  the  first  part  of  the  Fifteenth 
Article,  in  which  we  say  that  the  ceremonies  and  ordinances  which 
can  be  kept  conscientiously,  without  sin,  and  which  promote  order 
and  tranquillity,  should  be  observed  in  the  Church'." 

Diversity  in  the  Interpretation  and  Application  of  the  Prin- 
ciples WHICH  Regulate  Human  Ordinances  in  the  Church. 
Whilst,  however,  there  is  this  unanimity  of  opinion  respecting  the 
divine  authority  of  these  principles  which  regulate  human  ordinan- 
ces in  the  Church,  we  shall  presently  see,  in   the  consideration  of 
.36 


550  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

particular  human  ordinances,  how  various  and  discordant  are  the 
views  of  men  with  regard  to  their  meaning  and  apphcation.  In  re- 
ference to  the  principle  that  human  ordinances  must  be  observed 
without  sin,  it  is  indeed  manifest  and  universally  admitted  in  the 
church,  that  in  any  conflict  of  authority  between  divine  law  and  hu- 
man ordinances,  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  men;  yet  there 
is  much  diversity  of  opinion  whether  human  ordinances  and  usages, 
which  are  now  established  in  many  portions  of  the  Church,  are 
transgressions  of  positive  precepts  or  just  inferences  from  the  divine 
word — actual  transgression  being  "every  action,  whether  external 
or  internal,  which  conflicts  with  the  law  of  God." 

In  like  manner  we  find  diversity  of  views  respecting  the  interpre- 
tation and  application  of  the  divinely  ordained  principles  of  "tran- 
quillity and  good  order,"  which  also  regulate  human  ordinances  in 
the  Church.  Concord  in  the  visible.  Church  is  enjoined  by  the  divine 
word:  "Be  at  peace  among  yourselves,"  i  Thess.  v.  13.  "Follow 
peace  with  all,"  Heb.  xii.  14.  But  what  is  peace  in  the  Church? 
When  Christ  says  :  "  I  came  not  to  send  peace,  but  a  sword,"  Matt. 
X.  34,  he  not  only  proclaims  the  irrepressible  conflict  between  truth 
and  error,  but  he  discriminates  between  a  true  and  fictitious  peace  in 
the  Church.  Good  order  is  likewise  a  positive  purpose  of  human 
ordinances  in  the  Church,  according  to  the  divine  precept :  "  Let  all 
things  be  done  decently  and  in  order,"  i  Cor.  xiv.  40.  The  divine 
will  conforms  to  this  principle  which  binds  the  human  agency  in  the 
development  of  the  Church.  "  God  is  not  the  author  of  confusion," 
I  Cor.  xiv.  33.  Indeed  order,  as  a  manifestation  of  law,  pervades 
the  entire  government  of  God.  "  Order  is  Heaven's  first  law."  As 
God  has  bound  the  operation  of  his  own  power,  so  has  He  that  of 
man,  to  laws,  by  which  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth  are  created 
and  controlled.  The  well-known  words  of  Richard  Hooker,  in  the 
closing  paragraph  (8)  of  his  first  book  on  "  Ecclesiastical  Polity,"  may 
appropriately  be  recalled :  "  Of  law  there  can  be  no  less  acknowl- 
edged than  that  her  seat  is  the  bosom  of  God,  her  voice  the  har- 
mony of  the  world.  All  things  in  heaven  and  earth  do  her  homage; 
the  very  least  as  feeling  her  care,  and  the  greatest  as  not  exempted 
from  her  power.  Both  angels  and  men  and  creatures  of  what  con- 
dition soever,  though  each  in  different  sort  and  manner,  yet  all  with 
uniform  consent  admiring  her  as  the  mother  of  their  peace  and  joy." 
But  whilst  the  principle  of  good  order  is  generally  recognized  as  a 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH,  55 1 

divine  precept,  the  protracted  and  ofttiines  violent  controversy  with 
respect  to  various  rites  and  usages  of  the  Church,  attests  that  there 
is  no  uniformity  of  judgment  as  to  the  right  appHcation  of  that 
principle  in  the  cultus  of  the  Church.  As  the  various  creeds  of 
Christendom  arise,  not  from  any  diversity  of  view  respecting  the 
authority  of  the  objective  word,  but  from  the  diversity  of  subjective 
apprehension  of  the  word;  so  human  ordinances  in  the  Church,  re- 
specting modes  of  worship  and  forms  of  government,  differ,  not  be- 
cause there  is  no  general  acceptance  of  the  principles  of  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  word  and  its  divine  precepts  enjoining  tranquillity 
and  good  order  in  the  Church,  but  because  the  judgments  of  men 
differ  in  regard  to  their  meaning  and  application.  Our  Article, 
therefore,  in  the  second  place,  exhibits  this  truth,  viz.:  that  whilst 
there  is  an  agreement  betvveen  the  confessors  and  their  adversaries, 
respecting  the  designation  of  principles  which  must  regulate  human 
ordinances,  yet  there  is  no  agreement  with  the  Roman  Church,  on 
the  one  hand,  nor  with  the  Reformed  Churches,  on  the  other, 
respecting-  the  interpretation  and  application  of  these  principles  to 
specific  human  ordinances  in  the  Church.  There  is  indeed  no  anti- 
thesis, or  condemnatory  clause  to  the  Fifteenth  Article,  such  as  is 
found  in  eight  of  the  fourteen  preceding  Articles  of  the  Confession. 
There  is  no  designation  of  adversaries,  as  Romanists  or  Anabap- 
tists; and  Burger  in  his  "  Evangelischer  Glaube  "  commenting  on 
this  Article,  says  that  "  a  special  antithesis  is  omitted  out  of  forbear- 
ance in  the  Augustana,  because  it  would  only  have  been  pointed 
against  the  Papists."*  But  whilst  we  can  perceive  throughout  the 
Confession  a  studied  forbearance  to  irritate  the  Romanists,  there  is 
no  hesitation,  in  the  Fifteenth  Article,  to  condemn  the  error  of  any 
adversary. 

Error  of  the  Reformed  Churches. 

The  Fifteenth  Article  of  the  Confession,  in  its  truly  conservative 
and  scriptural  interpretation  and  application  of  the  principles  of  the 
supremacy  of  the  divine  word,  and  of  its  precepts  enjoining  tran- 
quillity and  good  order,  in  the  regulation  of  human  ordinances  in 
the  Church,  points,  not  only  against  the  Papists,  but  anticipates  the 

^  Eine  besondere  Antithese  ist  aber  dennoch  aus  Schonung  in  der  Augus- 
tana weggelassen,  well  sie  nur  gegen  die  Papisten  wiirder  gericlitet  gewesen 
sein. — Vol.  2,  p.  196. 


552  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

error  of  most  of  the  Reformed  Churches  which  subsequently 
separated  from  the  Evangehcal  Confession.  In  the  first  place,  our 
Article  maintains  that  "  set  holidays,  feasts,  and  such  like,  are  to  be 
observed."  In  this  specific  application  of  the  principles  which  regu- 
late human  ordinances,  it  cannot  be  said  that  it  "  points  against  the 
Papists;"  for  they  observe  "  set  holidays,  feasts  and  such  like;"  but, 
in  this  respect,  it  does  point  against  the  the  Anabaptists  of  the  time 
of  the  Reformation,  and  against  most  of  the  Reformed  Churches 
which  subsequently  arose,  and  which  discarded  "  set  holidays,  feasts, 
and  such  like,"  on  the  ground  that  a  right  interpretation  and  appli- 
cation of  the  principles  regulating  human  ordinances  in  the  Church, 
did  not  sanction  their  observance.  This  reference  to  those  who,  in 
abandoning  the  errors  of  the  Romanists  in  their  false  interpretation 
and  application  of  these  principles,  nevertheless  swung  to  an  oppo- 
site extreme  and  discarded  also  the  truly  conservative  interpretation 
of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Confession  relative  to  Church  ordi- 
nances, is  thus  represented  by  Prof  Zockler,  in  his  work  "  Die  Augs- 
burgische  Confession,"  p.  256:  "The  attitude  of  our  Confession,  so 
far  as  it  holds  fast  to  these  elements  of  ritual-tradition — always  only 
in  a  form  determined  and  purified  according  to  the  Scriptures — is 
opposed  to  all  subjectivism  and  unchurchly  radicalism.  It  takes  a 
decided  position  against  that  iconoclastic  zeal  and  that  rude  break- 
ing with  Christian  history  which  characterizes  most  Reformed 
Churches  and  sects."*  He  then  specifies  "the  Scottish  Presbyter- 
ians as  having  removed  all  ecclesiastical  festivals  except  Sunday," 
and  the  Zwinglians  in  Switzerland,  as  having  stricken  "  churchly  an- 
niversaries, except  the  chief  yearly  festivals,  from  the  calendar,  and 
therewith  have  banished  from  the  Church,  bells,  organs,  altars,  pic- 
tures, and  crucifixes,  the  customary  order  of  pericopes,  and  liturgi- 
cal forms  of  prayer;  all  these  in  supposed  following  of  apostolic 
example  and  precept,  but  in  truth  moved  by  a  spirit  of  abstract,  un- 
historical  radicalism,  and  of  an  overstrained  zeal,  even  to  an  icono- 
clastic extreme,  against  real  or  only  imaginary  idolatry  in  the 
Church." 

In  the  Directory  for  the  public  worship  of  God,  which  was  drawn 
up  by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  accepted  by  the   Church  of 

*  Sie  kert  sich  mit  Entschiedenheit  gegen  jenen  bilderstiirmerischen  Eifer 
und  jenes  schroffe  Brechen  mit  der  christlischen  Geschichte,  welches  die  meis- 
ten  reformirten  Kirchen  und  Secten  characterisirt. 


HUMAN  ORDINANCES  IN  THE  CHURCH.        553 

Scotland  in  1645,  there  is  an  appendix  which  declares  that  festival 
days,  vulgarly  called  holidays,  having  no  warrant  in  the  word  of 
God,  are  not  to  be  continued;  nevertheless,  it  is  lawful  and  necessary 
upon  special  and  emergent  occasions,  to  separate  a  day  or  days  for 
public  fasting  or  thanksgiving,  as  the  several  eminent  and  extraor- 
dinary dispensations  of  God's  providence  shall  administer  cause  and 
opportunity  to  his  people.  Cf  Art.  "  Festivals,"  by  Rev.  J.  S.  Black, 
Ency.  Brit.,  9th  ed.  » 

Error  of  the  Roman  Church. 

But  if  the  Fifteenth  Article  of  the  Confession  declares  against  the 
false  interpretation  and  application  of  the  principles  whicn  regulate 
human  ordinances,  as  represented  in  most  Reformed  Churches, 
equally  decided  is  its  protest  against  the  false  interpretation  and  ap- 
plication of  these  principles  by  the  Roman  Church.  Indeed,  this 
Article  illustrates  the  chief  controversy  between  the  Roman  and  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Churches.  For  the  Roman  Church  at  the 
time  of  the  Reformation  attached  a  justifying  merit  to  the  observ- 
ance of  human  ordinances  and  traditions,  as  it  does  to  this  day. 
Therefore,  according  to  the  Evangelical  Church,  the  Roman  Church 
violated  the  principle  that  only  such  human  ordinances  should  be 
observed  "which  may  be  observed  without  sin."  It  is  clearly  in 
opposition  to  the  ordinances  and  usages  of  the  Roman  Church  that 
the  concluding  and  greater  portion  of  the  Fifteenth  Article  of  the 
Confession  teaches  this  doctrine,  viz.  :  "  Men  are  to  be  admonished 
that  human  traditions  instituted  to  propitiate  God,  to  merit  grace 
and  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are  opposed  to  the  Gospel  and  the 
doctrine  of  faith.  Wherefore  vows  and  traditions  concerning  foods 
and  days,  and  such  like,  instituted  to  merit  grace  and  make  satis- 
faction for  sins,  are  useless  and  contrary  to  the  Gospel."  That  the 
Roman  Church  teaches  justification  by  works  enjoined  by  human 
ordinances,  as  well  as  by  faith  in  Christ,  is  manifest  from  the  follow- 
ing canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  : 

"If  any  one  saith  that  justifying  faith  is  nothing  else  but  confi- 
dence in  the  divine  mercy,  which  remits  sins  for  Christ's  sake;  or 
that  this  confidence,  alone,  is  that  whereby  we  are  justified;  let  him 
be  anathema."     Sess.  14,  Can.  12. 

"  If  any  one  saith  that  satisfaction  for  sins,  as  to  their  temporal 
punishment,  is  nowise  made  to  God,  through  the  merits  of  Jesus 


554  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Christ,  by  the  punishments  inflicted  by  him,  and  patiently  borne,  or 
by  those  enjoined  by  the  priest,  nor  even  by  those  voluntarily  un- 
dertaken, by  fastings,  prayers,  alms-deeds,  or  by  other  works  also 
of  piety;  and  that  therefore  the  best  penance  is  merely  a  new  life; 
let  him  be  anathema."     Sess.  14,  Can.  13. 

"  If  any  one  saith  that  the  satisfactions  by  which  penitents  redeem 
their  sins  through  Jesus  Christ,  are  not  a  worship  of  God,  but  tradi- 
tions of  men  which  obscure  the  doctrines  of  grace,  and  the  true 
worship  of  God,  and  the  benefit  itself  of  the  death  of  Christ;  let  him 
be  anathema."     Sess.  14,  Can.  14. 

Corresponding  to  this  doctrine  of  good  works,  the  Roman  Church 
institutes  ordinances  and  usages,  such  as  monastic  vows,  fastings, 
difference  of  meats,  observance  of  days,  pilgrimages,  penances,  in- 
dulgences, rosaries,  auricular  confession,  celibacy,  extreme  unction, 
worship  of  saints,  etc.  That  Church  maintains  that  one  by  such 
means  appeases  God  and  merits  grace,  and  that  the  observance  of 
these  ordinances,  from  such  motives  and  with  such  an  object,  does 
not  in  the  least  contradict  the  Gospel  and  the  doctrine  of  faith  in 
Christ.  But  with  such  a  view  of  the  value  of  human  ordinances, 
they  cannot  be  observed  without  sin.  The  evangelical  doctrine  as 
declared  in  our  Article,  teaches  that  human  "  traditions  *  *  in- 
stituted to  merit  grace  and  make  satisfaction  for  sin,  are  useless  and 
contrary  to  the  Gospel."  The  Apology  of  the  Confession  (VIII.) 
characterizes  such  a  view  of  human  ordinances,  as  "  evidently  a 
Jewish  principle,  in  fact  a  suppression  of  the  Gospel  by  the  doctrine 
of  the  devil."  Paul  condemns  it  in  speaking  of  those  who  "being 
ignorant  of  God's  righteousness,  and  going  about  to  establish  their 
own  righteousness,  have  not  submitted  themselves  unto  the  right- 
eousness of  God,"  Rom.  x.  3.  Christ  rebukes  it  when  he  says,  "  in 
vain  they  do  worship  me,  teaching  for  doctrines  the  commandments 
of  men,"  Matt.  xv.  9.  The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone, 
is  the  subject  of  the  Fourth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  The 
doctrine  of  good  works  as  the  will  of  God  and  the  fruit  of  faith,  is 
the  subject  of  the  Sixth  Article  of  the  Confession.  The  doctrine  of 
the  relation  between  faith  and  good  works,  is  the  subject  of  the 
Twentieth  Article.  Hence,  as  the  nature  and  value  of  good  works 
are  thus  completely  considered  in  other  Articles  of  the  Confession, 
it  is  not  designed  in  the  consideration  of  our  Article  to  discuss  par- 
ticularly the  doctrine  of  the  merit  of  good  works.     This  doctrine  is 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  555 

introduced  into  the  Fifteenth  Article,  in  order  to  define  the  negative 
aspect  of  human  ordinances  in  the  Church,  viz.:  that  they  are  not 
designed  to  propitiate  God,  to  merit  his  favor,  or  to  make  satisfac- 
tion for  sins. 

Positive  Doctrine  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church. 

Therefore  it  is  the  positive  doctrine  taught  in  this  Article  which 
especially  claims  our  attention,  viz.:  that  human  ordinances  "  are  to 
be  observed  which  may  be  observed  without  sin,  and  are  profitable 
for  tranquillity  and  good  order  in  the  Church."  The  right  interpre- 
tation and  application  of  these  principles  to  specific  human  ordi- 
nances in  the  Church  have  their  source,  (i)  in  the  science  of  her- 
meneutics,  with  respect  to  the  correct  apprehension  of  the  divine 
word,  by  which  it  is  determined  whether  they  are  observed  without 
sin;  (2)  to  the  science  of  ethics,  with  respect  to  the  determination 
of  that  which  is  right  as  the  condition  of  true  tranquillity;  and  (3) 
to  the  science  of  aesthetics,  with  respect  to  the  determination  of  that 
which  is  beautiful,  harmonious,  and  appropriate,  as  essential  ele- 
ments in  the  law  of  good  order.  Through  these  sciences  the  intui- 
tive conceptions  or  ideas  of  the  human  mind,  respecting  the  true, 
the  good  and  the  beautiful,  are  educated  into  a  correct  knowledge 
of  that  which  is  right  and  wrong  in  human  ordinances.  Conceding 
the  right  of  private  judgment  to  all,  and  disavowing  an  absolute 
infallibility  in  her  own  conclusions,  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church 
nevertheless  holds  that  she  has  been  educated  into  a  correct  under- 
standing and  application  of  the  principles  which  rightly  regulate 
human  ordinances  in  the  Church.  Her  position  amid  the  various 
subjective  views  of  men,  may,  on  the  one  hand,  be  called  radical, 
in  opposing  the  fundamental  error  of  the  Roman  Church,  which 
attaches  a  justifying  merit  to  their  observance;  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  may  be  called  conservative,  in  contrast  with  the  unchurchly 
views  and  practices  of  those  Reformed  denominations  which  ascribe 
to  their  observance  idolatry,  superstition,  or  insignificance. 

Specific  Human  Ordinances. 

If  we  now  consider  specific  human  ordinances  in  the  Church,  we 

observe  in  the  Fifteenth  Article  that  mention  is  made  only  of  "set 

holidays,  feasts  and  such  like."     The  Variata,  1540  (42),  in  place  of 

"feasts  and  such   like,"  supplies,  "certain  devotional    hymns   and 


556  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Other  similar  rites,"  (certae  cantiones  piae  et  alii  similes  ritus).  The 
Apology  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  (VIII.)  says  :  "  the  three  chief 
festivals,  Sunday,  and  the  like,  which  were  established  for  the  sake  of 
order,  union  and  peace,  we  cheerfully  observe."  It  also  mentions  a 
local  customary  "  every  Sunday  observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper ;" 
it  regards  with  special  favor  the  custom  of  catechisation;  it  con- 
demns the  adversaries  for  neglecting  the  preaching  of  the  word  in 
many  countries  during  the  whole  year,  except  only  in  Lent.  In  the 
Twenty-sixth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  it  is  said,  "many 
ceremonies  and  traditions  are  observed  by  us,  such  as  Mass  [not 
however  in  the  sense  of  the  Roman  Church,  but  in  the  sense  of 
necessary  ceremonies  attending  the  evangelical  administration  of 
the  Lord's  Supper],  singing  of  hymns,  festivals,  etc.,  which  are  cal- 
culated to  promote  order  in  the  Church."  Thus  we  observe  that 
"holidays  and  festivals,"  are  prominent  in  the  Confession  and  its 
Apology,  as  human  ordinances  rightly  instituted  in  the  Church. 
They  are  prominent  because  the  administration  of  the  means  of 
grace,  the  public  worship  of  God,  and  the  commemoration  of  sacred 
events  in  the  planting  of  the  Christian  Church,  necessarily  require 
stated  times  for  their  observance;  and  because  different  opinions 
existed  respecting  the  nature  and  necessity  of  the  festivals  of  the 
Church. 

All  specific  human  ordinances  in  the  Church  may,  however,  be 
included  in  the  following  classification,  viz.: 

I.  Times  of  Divine  Service. 

II.  Modes  of  Divine  Service. 

III.  The  Constitution  and  Administration  of  Government. 

IV.  The  Conservation  of  the  Faith. 

The  limits  assigned  to  this  lecture  compel  a  brief  and,  on  that 
account,  somewhat  unsatisfactory  consideration  and  discussion,  even 
of  the  prominent  specific  human  ordinances  under  each  of  the  fore- 
going classes. 

•  I.  Times  of  Divine  Service. 

The  principles  regulating  human  ordinances  in  the  Church  are  to 
be  applied  to  the  times  of  divine  service. 

a.  Tlie  Lord's  Day :  Ground  of  Obligation  for  its  Observance.  Of 
most  frequent  occurrence,  and  of  chief  importance  among  the  holi- 
days and  festivals,  is  the  weekl}^  observance  of  the  Lord's    day. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  557 

Here,  however,  at  the  threshold  of  our  view  of  special  ordinances 
in  the  Church,  we  meet  a  somewhat  perplexing  question,  viz. :  what 
is  the  ground  of  the  obligation  to  observe  the  Lord's  day?  If  that 
day  is  to  be  observed  because  of  a  divine  command  that  at  least  one 
day  in  seven  shall  be  devoted  to  holy  use,  as  distinct  from  secular 
use,  then  this  divine  appointment  involves  essentially  the  ceremonial 
element  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  hence  it  does  not  pertain  to 
human  ordinances  to  designate  the  proportion  of  time  which  shall 
be  devoted  to  holy  use.  Yet  the  Confessions  of  our  Church  seem 
clearly  to  teach  that  the  designation  of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  as 
a  time  to  be  employed  in  holy  use,  is  not  to  be  referred  to  a  divine 
obligation  that  the  specified  proportion  of  one  day  in  seven  is  to  be 
kept  as  a  holy  day,  but  that  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  day  is  to 
be  referred  to  the  necessity  for  such  suitable  time  as  the  Church,  in 
the  exercise  of  he?  liberty,  shall  apportion,  in  order  statedly  to  ad- 
minister the  means  of  grace,  and  to  worship  God  publicly  in  the 
sanctuary.  The  Augsburg  Confession,  Art.  XXVIII.,  says:  "What 
then  should  be  held  concerning  Sunday  and  other  similar  Church 
ordinances  and  ceremonies?  To  this  we  reply:  That  the  bishops 
or  pastors  may  make  such  regulations,  so  that  things  may  be  carried 
on  orderly  in  the  Church.  *  *  *  Those,  then,  who  are  of  opin- 
ion that  such  institution  of  Sunday  instead  of  the  Sabbath,  was 
established  as  a  thing  necessary,  err  very  much.  For  the  Holy 
Scripture  has  abolished  the  Sabbath,  and  it  teaches  that  all  cere- 
monies of  the  old  law,  since  the  revelation  of  the  gospel,  may  be 
discontinued.  And  yet,  as  it  was  necessary  to  appoint  a  certain  day, 
so  that  the  people  might  know  when  they  should  assemble,  the 
Christian  Church  ordained  Sunday  for  that  purpose,  and  possessed 
rather  more  inclination  and  willingness  for  this  alteration,  in  order 
that  the  people  might  have  an  example  of  Christian  liberty,  that 
they  might  know  that  neither  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  nor  of 
any  other  day,  is  indispensable."  *  Luther,  in  his  Larger  Catechism, 
commenting  on  the  Third  Commandment,  says:  "  It  is  necessary  to 
observe  that  we  keep  the  Sabbath  day  [Lord's  day],  *  *  *  mostly 
for  the  purpose  of  enabling  us  to  embrace  time  and  opportunity  on 
these  Sabbath  days,  since  we  cannot  otherwise  embrace  them,  to 
attend  to  divine  service,  so  that  we  may  assemble  ourselves  to  hear 
and  treat   of  the  word  of  God,  and  to  praise  him,  by  singing  and 

[*  Book  of  Concord,  Henkel's  Eng.  Edit.,  p.  137. 


558  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

prayer.  But  this,  I  say,  is  not  so  confined  to  time  as  it  was  among 
the  Jews,  that  it  must  be  precisely  this  or  that  day,  for  one  day  is 
not  better  in  itself  than  another,  but  it  should  be  daily  attended  to ; 
but  since  the  common  class  of  people  cannot  attend  to  it,  we  should 
reserve  one  day  in  the  week,  at  least,  for  this  purpose.  Inasmuch, 
however,  as  Sunday  has  been  set  apart  from  old  for  this  purpose,  we 
should  therefore  let  it  remain  so,  that  the  Sabbath  may  be  observed 
with  uniformity,  and  that  no  one  create  disorder  through  unneces- 
sary innovation."  *  The  foregoing  language  of  the  Confessions  in- 
dicates that  the  moral  obligation  of  the  Third  Commandment  does 
not  pertain  to  the  designation  of  one-seventh  of  time  for  holy  use  as 
distinct  from  secular  use,  but  to  the  holy  use  of  whatsoever  time  hu- 
man ordinances,  in  conformity  to  the  law  of  good  order,  may  desig- 
nate for  the  administration  of  the  word  and  sacraments,  and  for  the 
■worship  of  God.  In  other  words,  under  the  gospel,  there  is  no  day 
nor  time,  in  itself,  by  divine  command,  more  holy  than  another;  but 
there  is  a  divine  obligation  resting  upon  the  Church  to  administer  the 
means  of  grace  and  to  worship  God  publicly  in  the  sanctuary,  cf  Mt. 
xxviii.  19,  20;  Heb.  x.  25;  and  consequently  to  set  apart  such  times 
for  these  purposes,  as  the  law  of  good  order  may  designate,  i  Cor.  xiv. 
40.  This  doctrine  of  the  Confession  seems  to  be  sanctioned  by  the 
divine  word.  The  seventh  day,  which  God  blessed  and  sanctified  at 
creation.  Gen.  ii.  2,  3,  may  be  understood,  consistently  with  the  various 
durations  of  time  which  Gesenius  assigns  to  the  word  py,  day.f 
as  the  last  of  those  vast  geological  periods  which  science  requires 
for  the  creation  and  existence  of  the  pre-Adamite  world.  "They 
who  contend,"  says  Tayler  Lewis,  "  that  the  divine  Sabbath  is  sim- 
ply the  first  twenty-four  hours  after  creation,  make  it  unmeaning  as 
predicated  of  God  and  his  works."  Lange  Com.  Gen.,  p.  196.  This 
interpretation  of  the  Sabbath,  instituted  in  Paradise,  as  the  begin- 
ning of  the  rest  of  God  from  all  creative  work,  and  which  rest  is  to 
end  at  "  the  regeneration"  when  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth 

*  Book  of  Concord,  Henkel's  Eng.  Edit.,  p.  449. 

t "  Spoken  of  the  natural  day,  from  the  rising  lo  the  setting  sun,  also  of  the 
civil  day,  or  twenty-four  hours,  which  includes  the  night."  Also,  "time," 
Gesen.  Heb.  Lex.  Sub.  ^)'>.  Such  also  is  the  varied  signification  of  day  in 
English.  "  I.  The  space  of  time  between  the  rising  and  setting  of  the  sun. 
2.  The  whole  time  or  period  of  one  revolution  of  the  earth  on  its  axis,  or  twenty- 
four  hours.  3.  Age ;  time  with  reference  to  the  existence  of  a  person  or  thing." 
—  Webster's  Diet, 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  559 

shall  appear.  Rev.  xxi.  i,  is  in  harmony  with  the  New  Testament 
idea,  that  under  the  gospel  dispensation  there  is  no  divinely  or- 
dained distinction  of  days,  but  that  every  day  is  to  be  sanctified. 
Hence  the  reference  in  the  Third  Commandment  to  the  seventh  day 
of  rest,  which  began  at  the  end  of  the  six  creative  days,  may  be  un- 
derstood analogically;  for  as  Gerhard  says  in  his  "  Loci  Theologici:" 
"  Neither  is  there  in  Genesis  any  trace  of  the  sanctification  of  the 
seventh  day  before  the  giving  of  the  Law."*  The  observance  of 
the  Sabbath,  Ex.  xvi.  26,  previous  to  the  announcement  of  the 
Third  Commandment  at  Sinai,  Ex.  xx.  8,  and  which  Dr.  Paley  con- 
siders its  first  institution.  Moral  Philos,  Bk.  V.,  ch.  7,  may  be  under- 
stood prolepticall)',  as  is  the  Saviour's  announcement  to  Nicodemus 
of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  which  was  not  formally 
announced  to  the  Church  until  the  great  commission  was  given, 
after  the  resurrection.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20.  The  New  Testament 
indicates  the  abrogation  not  only  of  a  specific  but  of  a  generic  dis- 
tinction of  days.  "  One  m.an  esteemeth  one  day  above  another, 
another  esteemeth  every  day  alike.  Let  every  man  be  fully  per- 
suaded in  his  own  mind.  He  that  regardeth  the  day,  regardeth  it 
unto  the  Lord,"  Rom.  xiv.  5,  6.  The  meaning  of  the  apostle  seems 
evidently  to  be,  that  if  a  man  regardeth  a  day  at  all  as  the  Sabbath, 
it  should  be  because  of  the  holy  use  of  the  day  as  distinct  from  sec- 
ular use,  and  not  because  one  day  in  itself  is  to  be  esteemed  above 
another.  "  He  struck  not  at  a  day  but  at  a  principle,  jf  *  *  he 
only  meant  to  establish  a  new  set  of  days  in  the  place  of  the  old, 
there  is  no  intelligent  principle  for  which  he  is  contending,  and  that 
earnest  apostle  is  only  a  champion  for  one  day  instead  of  another, 
an  assertor  of  the  eternal  sanctities  of  Sunday,  instead  of  the  eternal 
sanctities  of  Saturday,"  Rev.  F.  W.  Robertson,  Serm.  vol.  2,  p.  202. 
"  The  obvious  inference  from  his  (Paul's)  arguing,  is  that  he  *  * 
believed  all  times  and  days  alike,"  Alford,  Com.,  Rom.  xiv.  6.  "  Let 
no  man,  therefore,  judge  you  in  respect  of  a  holy  day,  or  of  the  new 
moon,  or  of  the  Sabbaths;  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come; 
but  the  body  is  of  Christ,"  Col.  ii.  16,  17.  "The  holiday  is  yearly; 
the  new  moon,  monthly;  the  Sabbaths  weekly.  *  *  Paul  intimates 
here  the  removal  of  all  distinctions  of  days;  Christ  clearly  taught 
the  liberty  of  the   Sabbath.     *     *     The  Lord's  day  is  mentioned, 

*  XIII.  ^139.     Note.     *    *    nee  ullum  exstat  vestigium  sanctificationis  diei 
septimi  in  Genesi  ante  promulgationem  legis. 


56o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

not  enjoined.  A  stated  day  is  useful  and  necessary  to  those  who  are 
engrossed  in  worldly  concerns.  They  who  keep  a  continual  Sab- 
bath, enjoy  greater  liberty.  The  Sabbath  is  a  type  even  of  eternal 
things,  Heb.  iv.  3,  4,  yet  its  obligation  does  not  therefore  continue 
in  the  New  Testament,  otherwise  the  new  moons  should  be  retained," 
Bengel,  Gnomon,  Col.  ii.  16.  The  doctripe  of  the  Evangelical  Luth- 
eran Church  in  regard  to  the  ground  of  obligation  for  the  observ- 
ance of  the  Lord's  Day  is  thus  stated  by  Rev.  H.  E.  Jacobs,  D.  D. 
"  She  utterly  repudiates  the  Sabbath  as  a  day,  call  it  by  what  name 
you  please.  She  regards  every  day  as  the  Sabbath  of  the  believer, 
and  no  day  as  the  Sabbath  of  the  unbeliever.  *  *  Whilst  reject- 
ing the  Sabbath  as  apart  of  the  ceremonial  law,  she  clings  with  affec- 
tion to  the  day  on  which  her  Lord  rose,  as  a  day  to  rejoice  and  be 
glad  in,  as  a  day  on  which  the  great  congregation  can  assemble,  and 
join  heart  and  voice  with  the  church  triumphant  in  ascriptions  of 
honor  and  glory  to  him  that  loved  us  and  gave  himself  for  us.  *  * 
She  will  allow  no  one  to  judge  her  with  respect  to  the  Sabbath  day; 
but  at  the  same  time,  she  will  allow  no  one  to  deprive  her  of  the 
■Lord's  day,"  Ev.  Rev.,  vol.  xx,  p.  152. 

b.  The  Christian  Year. — From  the  consideration  of  weekly  festi- 
vals, we  turn  to  that  of  yearly  festivals.  As  the  moral  element  in 
the  observance  of  the  Lord's  day  consists  in  the  holy  use  of  time  as 
distinct  from  its  secular  use,  and  the  ceremonial  element  appears  in 
the  designation  of  times  and  modes  of  observance  according  to  the 
law  of  good  order;  so  we  find  a  moral  and  a  ceremonial  element  in 
the  ground  of  obligation  for  the  observance  of  yearly  festivals.  The 
moral  element  is  the  recognition  of  remarkable  manifestations  of 
divine  providence  and  grace ;  the  ceremonial  element  is  the  desig- 
nation of  such  events  in  conformity  to  the  law  of  good  order. 
Un-der  the  Old  Testament,  the  divine  ordinances  required  the  yearly 
commemoration  of  important  events  in  thq  constitution  and  develop- 
ment of  the  Jewish  Church.  These  stated  festivals  afforded  oppor- 
tunity to  instruct  the  people  in  the  essential  truths  relative  to  the 
events;  they  did  much  to  confirm  the  faith  of  the  Jews  in  their 
religion,  and  were  of  great  advantage  in  promoting  acquaintance 
and  friendship  among  the  several  Jewish  tribes.  The  most  con- 
spicuous of  these  Jewish  festivals  was  typical  of  the  atonement  for 
sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lamb  of  God;  another  was  typical  of  the 
outpouring  of  the    Holy   Spirit   in   the   planting   of  the  Christian 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  56 1 

Church.  The  moral  element  in  both  these  Jewish  festivals  is  per- 
petuated under  the  gospel,  by  the  special  recognition  of  divine 
grace  in  the  fulfillment  of  the  type  by  the  observance  of  Good- 
Friday  and  Whit-Sunday  as  holy  days.  The  ceremonial  element 
in  the  Jewish  festivals  is  modified  by  the  Christian  Church,  so  as  to 
designate  only  such  festivals  as  the  ethical  and  ^esthetic  principles 
of  the  law  of  good  order  determine,  viz.:  that  yearly  festivals  of  the 
Christian  Church  should  not  be  excessive  in  number,  and  should 
be  restricted  to  a  recognition  of  the  chief  events  in  the  life  of  Christ, 
and  of  those  doctrines  which  are  essential  to  salvation.  Wicklif, 
the  forerunner  of  the  Reformation,  is  represented  by  Neander,  in  his 
Church  History,*  as  contending  that  in  his  day  many  thought  that 
all  saint-day  festivals  should  be  abolished,  and  the  festivals  of  Christ 
alone  remain;  for  thus  Christ  would  be  kept  in  more  lively  remem- 
brance, and  the  devotion  of  the  faithful  would  not  be  so  improperly 
distributed  between  Christ  and  his  members.  As  reasons  for  the 
observance  of  yearly  festivals  or  holidays  by  the  Christian  Church, 
it  may  be  said,  that  if  those  events  of  the  Jewish  Church  which 
typified  the  advent  of  Christ  were  worthy  of  commemoration,  much 
more  worthy  are  those  which  have  so  wonderfully  fulfilled  the  type. 
If  there  are  any  events  worthy  of  a  special  commemoration,  they 
are  those  which  characterize  the  earthly  life  of  our  Saviour;  and  if 
there  are  truths  worthy  of  special  recognition,  they  are  those  which 
he  uttered.  The  same  reason  which  justifies  the  celebration  of  our 
national  anniversary  and  Thanksgiving  day,  sanctions  the  usage  of 
the  Christian  Church,  in  the  exercise  of  her  liberty  with  respect  to 
the  observance  of  days,  to  set  apart  certain  days  to  commemorate 
exclusively  the  great  events  and  fundamental  truths  of  Christianity. 
"  The  pillars  on  which  Christianity  rests  are  matters  of  fact,  such  as  the 
birth,  miracles,  crucifixion,  resurrection  and  ascension  of  the  Saviour. 
Hence  any  rational  method  tending  to  extend  and  perpetuate  the 
knowledge  of  these  facts  must  exert  a  salutary  influence  on  Christi- 
anity itselff  A  systematic  arrangement  of  the  festivals  and  holidaj-s 
of  the  Church  into  a  calendar  exhibits  the  Christian  year;  the  design 
of  which  is  thus  set  forth  in  a  sermon  by  Dr.  Ahlfeld,  translated  by 
Rev.  L.  \V.  Heydenreich,  in  Ev.  Rev.,  Vol.  V,  p.  280:  "The  Church 

*Eng.  Ed.,  Vol.  V,  p.  169. 

fS.  S.  Schumucker,  D.  D.,  Lutheran  Manual,  p.  175. 


562  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

has  become  almost  totally  unconscious  of  the  significance  of  her  ec- 
clesiastical year.  *  *  Some  may  perhaps  even  ask  the  question,  what 
has  the  year  to  do  with  the  Church,  or  what  has  the  Church  to  do 
with  the  year  ?  The  sun  rules  the  common  year.  One  rotation  of 
the  earth  around  it  constitutes  the  annual  circle,  which  successively 
develops  the  lovely  spring,  the  ardent  summer,  the  rich  autumn,  and 
the  severe  and  silent  winter.  Each  of  these  parts  has  its  peculiar 
character.  In  the  firmanent  of  the  Church,  there  also  stands  a  sun 
whose  name  is  Jesus  Christ ;  it  shines  by  day  and  by  night,  forever 
and  ever.  And  as  the  earth  moves  around  the  visible  sun,  so  the 
Church  moves  around  the  sun  of  divine  grace,  so  she  travels  through 
the  sacred  history  of  the  Saviour.  Her  spring  is  the  lovely  season 
of  Christmas  and  Epiphany,  when  Christ  is  born  a  man,  when  in  his 
glory  He  declares  himself  to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power.  Her 
summer  is  the  season  of  Lent,  and  the  Passion-time  of  Jesus  Christ, 
in  which  the  anticipation  of  His  death  rests  upon  her  like  heavy, 
sultry  days,  until  at  last  the  storm  of  death,  so  long  approaching, 
breaks  forth,  and  the  flash  of  lightning  descends  out  of  the  black 
sin-cloud  and  slays  the  righteous.  Her  harvest-time  and  autumn 
are  the  days  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  poured  out  upon  the  disciples, 
and  when  in  the  lovely,  long  Trinity  Sundays,  one  kind  of  fruit 
after  another  of  the  gifts  of  the  Triune  God  is  borne  into  the  gran- 
ary of  the  heart.  The  greatest  diversity  of  events  in  the  life  of  the 
Lord  are  crowded  into  this  rich  period.  And  wherever  He  stands 
and  whatever  He  does  or  asks,  presents  a  field  from  which  the  be- 
liever may  reap  and  gather.  At  last  comes  the  severe  and  silent 
winter.  From  the  twentieth  Sunday  after  Trinity  begin  the  gospels 
which  treat  of  the  final  things.  *  *  On  the  last  Sunday,  the 
twenty-seventh  after  Trinity,  all  the  different  gospels  which  are  used 
treat  of  the  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of  glory.  Thus  on  the  first 
day  of  the  ecclesiastical  year,  the  Lord  is  announced  in  whom  we 
may  have  life  abundantly;  on  the  last  day,  believers  have  reached 
the  goal  of  all  their  labors.  The  ecclesiastical  year  is  a  correct 
one  ;  it  is  better  regulated  than  the  common  year.  It  begins  with 
its  spring-messengers  and  spring,  and  ends  not  only  with  winter, 
with  death  and  judgment,  but  also  with  victory  over  death  and 
judgment.  The  common  year  begins  with  winter,  and  at  its  close 
it  is  again  winter.  There  is  no  natural  progress  in  it.  The  Chris- 
tian's life  should  be  nothing  but  a  journey  around  this  heavenly  orb. 


HUMAN  ORDINANCES  IN  THE  CHURCH.        563 

in  order  that  he  may  experience  its  warming  and  enhghtening  in- 
fluences." These  extracts  show  that  the  design  of  the  Christian 
year  is  to  exhibit,  within  the  cycle  of  the  siderial  year,  and  in  "good 
order,"  the  truths  pertaining  to  the  persons  and  the  work  of  the 
Triune  God;  and,  hkevvise,  the  duties  and  experience  which  pertain 
immediately  to  the  Church.  This  idea  is  in  harmony  with  the  di- 
vine word,  that  "all  Scripture  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  and  instruc- 
tion in  righteousness,"  and  this  idea  is  best  realized  through  the 
systematic  arrangement  of  the  Christian  year.  The  two  services 
on  the  Lord's  day  and  one  in  the  midst  of  the  week  afford  oppor- 
tunity, not  only  for  the  commemoration  of  events  and  truths  desig- 
nated by  the  Christian  year,  but  for  the  consideration  and  improve- 
ment of  any  providential  events  or  necessities  in  the  experience  of 
the  local  congregations.  With  respect  to  the  arrangement  of  the 
Christian  year,  the  following  ideas  are  submitted,  and  which  are  de- 
rived from  an  article  by  Prof  Plitt,  of  Bonn,  on  "The  relation  of  the 
Sermon  to  the  Church  year,"  translated  by  Rev.  J.  D.  Severinghaus, 
in  the  Ev.  Rev.,  vol.  xviii.,  p.  169.  There  are  two  chief  divisions  of 
equal  length,  including  twenty-six  weeks  each.  The  first  division 
relates  chiefly  to  the  person  of  Christ,  beginning  with  the  first  Sun- 
day in  Advent,  or  the  fourth  Sunday  before  Christmas,  ending  with 
the  Sunday  which  commemorates  the  Trinity  of  the  Godhead.  The 
second  division  relates  especially  to  the  Church,  and  extends  from 
the  first  Sunday  after  Trinity  Sunday  to  the  first  Sunday  in  Advent. 
The  first  division  of  the  Church  year,  or  the  half  year  of  the  Lord, 
is  "the  season  of  commencing,  of  carrying  through,  and  of  finish- 
ing the  great  work,"  or,  Christmas  season,  a  Lent  season,  and  a  sea- 
son of  glorification.  The  birth  of  Christ  belongs  to  the  first;  his 
sufferings  and  death  to  the  second  ;  his  resurrection  and  ascension 
to  the  third.  With  regard  to  the  second  division,  i.  e.,  the  half  year 
of  the  Church,  "  we  have  also  a  time  of  beginning,  which  is  the 
season  of  the  apostles  and  their  doctrines ;  a  time  of  carrying 
through,  which  is  the  time  of  the  martyrs  and  of  sufferings  ;  a  time 
of  finishing,  which  is  the  season  of  the  angels  and  of  the  end,  or  of 
the  last  things,"  With  respect  to  this  outline  of  the  Christian  year 
and  its  observance,  it  may  be  said  that  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church,  consistently  with  the  doctrinal  position  of  the  Fifteenth 
Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  holds  a  conservative  position, 
between  that  of  the  Roman  Church  with  its  excessive  multiplication 


564  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  festal  and  saints'  days,  and  that  of  most  Reformed  Churches 
which  radically  proscribes  the  observance  of  any  special  days  to 
commemorate  the  great  facts  and  truths  of  Christianity.  It  is  to 
be  said,  however,  that  in  other  portions  of  the  Reformed  Churches, 
apart  from  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  there  are  indications  of 
a  growing  appreciation  of  a  proper  observance  of  the  Christian 
year. 

c.  ''Protracted  Meetings^ — There  is  a  usage  prevalent  in  some 
portions  of  the  Church,  which  relates  to  the  observance  of  special 
days  or  times  for  the  administration  of  the  word,  in  order  to  effect 
the  immediate  conversion  of  the  impenitent,  and  to  arouse  professing 
Christians  who  have  fallen  into  a  state  of  spiritual  indifference. 
Such  special  occasions  are  sometimes  called  "protracted  meetings." 
One  theory  upon  which  these  extra  meetings  are  held,  implies  that 
the  stated  administration  of  the  word  on  the  Lord's  day  and  once  in 
the  midst  of  the  week,  as  is  customary  in  most  churches,  is  not  an 
adequate  arrangement;  but  that  if  the  attention  of  men  is  held  contin- 
uously and  closely  for  a  season  to  the  subject  of  religion,  they  are 
more  apt  to  be  moved  to  a  holy  life,  than  if  there  are  constant  inter- 
vals of  several  days  between  the  preaching  of  the  word.  In  reply 
to  such  an  inference,  it  is  to  be  said  that,  as  "  the  Holy  Spirit  works 
faith,  when  and  where  it  pleases  God,  in  those  who  hear  the  gos- 
pel," Augs.  Con.,  Art.  V.,  that  is,  "  with  respect  to  the  presence, 
the  operations,  and  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  no  one  ought  to, 
or  can  always,  judge  ex  sensu,  that  is,  as  to  manner  and  time  in 
which  these  things  are  perceived  in  the  heart,  but  they  frequently 
occur,  and  are  concealed  under  our  great  imperfections,"  Form  Con- 
cord. Dec.  (II),  therefore  we  cannot  determine  the  inadequacy  of  the 
stated  administration  of  the  word,  if  we  do  not  perceive  immedi- 
ately the  fruit  of  the  Spirit's  power  in  the  word.  To  use  an  illustra- 
tion of  Chemnitz:  "Just  as  the  motion  of  the  air  is  now  violent, 
now  gentle,  now  not  perceived  at  all,  so  the  regenerated  must  know 
that  the  presence  and  operating  power  of  the  Spirit  is  not  measured 
by  the  perception  of  spiritual  movements."*  It  seems  to  be  a  just 
inference,  however,  that  the  attempt  to  determine  a  time  and  place 
for  the  manifestation  of  divine  grace  through  a  special  public  admin- 
istration of  the  word,  tends  to  the  disparagement  of  the  efficiency  of 

*Quoted  in  Besser's  "  Christ  the  Light  of  the  World,"  Huxtable's  trs,  p.  136. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  565 

its  stated  public  administration.  Extra  meetings  for  the  public  ad- 
ministration of  the  means  of  grace  may  be  advocated  consistently 
with  objections  to  the  revival  system,  when  they  are  not  based 
upon  the  same  ground  of  necessity  or  usefulness  as  that  upon  which 
the  revival  system  rests.  Such  extra  meetings  are  held  by  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  in  the  observance  of  the  Christian 
year;  in  the  custom  of  catechisation;  in  holding  services  preparatory 
to  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper;  and  in  personal  interviews 
M'ith  those  who  have  been  awakened  through  the  stated  public 
administration  of  the  means  of  grace.  If  there  is  necessity  for 
special  public  administration  of  the  word  tO'  adults  on  the  ground 
that  its  stated  public  administration  is  inadequate,  the  required 
opportunity  is  presented  in  catechisation ;  for  catechisation,  whilst 
it  is  principally  designed  to  be  an  official  administration  of  the  word 
to  the  children  of  the  Church,  who  receive  regenerating  grace  in 
Baptism,  in  order  to  prepare  them  for  communicant  membership  by 
their  voluntary  confirmation  of  baptismal  vows,  yet  it  likewise 
affords  an  opportunity  to  administer  the  word  to  adults  not  bap- 
tized, and  for  such  as  were  baptized  in  infancy,  but  who,  from 
neglect  to  nurture  the  spiritual  life  through  childhood,  have  fallen 
from  grace.  "Tested  by  its  fruits,  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  bap- 
tismal grace,  when  faithfully  preached  and  consistently  developed, 
will  bear  favorable  comparison  with  the  modern  system  of  period- 
ical efforts,  or  with  any  other  system  of  doctrine  and  usage  ever 
employed  for  the  promotion  of  experimental  religion  and  the  devel- 
opment of  true  piety,"  F.  W.  Conrad,  D.  D.,  Lect.  on  Baptism, 
p.  321.  The  objection  to  the  revival  system,  therefore,  does  notarise 
on  account  of  extra  meetings  in  themselves  considered,  but  because 
they  involve  the  inference  that  a  faithful  use  of  the  stated  times  and 
opportunities  for  administering  the  means  of  grace  are  not  adequate 
to  a  proper  development  of  the  Church,  and  because  it  is  assumed 
that  through  these  extra  meetings  the  development  of  the  Church 
is  best  realized.  Another  theory  upon  which  so-called  protracted 
meetings  are  maintained  is  the  alleged  attractive  power  in  the  extra 
meetings  which  is  available  for  bringing  large  numbers  under  the 
influence  of  the  truth,  and  which  does  not  pertain  to  the  stated  ser- 
vices of  the  sanctuary.  Upon  this  theory  we  cannot,  however,  refer 
the  attraction  simply  to  the  means  of  grace,  for  they  are,  in  them- 
selves considered,  as  eflficacious  at  one  time  as  another ;  hence,  any 
Z7 


566  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

superior  popularity  of  the  extra  meetings  of  tiie  revival  system 
must  be  referred  to  influences  which  are  incidental  to,  or  associated 
with,  the  administration  of  the  word;  such  as  the  excitement  awak- 
ened, or  expected,  from  the  mere  assembling  of  large  numbers  of 
people  on  special  occasions ;  the  curiosity  of  some  to  witness  the 
manifestations  of  alleged  spiritual  awakening  in  individuals;  or  sen- 
sationalism in  singing  or  in  preaching  the  word.  The  objection  to 
the  revival  system  as  a  human  agency  which  designates  a  periodical 
season  for  the  immediate  manifestation  of  divine  grace,  does  not  in- 
volve a  denial  of  the  fact  that  there  have  been  genuine  revivals  of 
religion  in  the  Church,  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the 
truth;  but  when  we  attempt  to  specify  the  human  agency  which 
developed  them,  or  to  indicate  the  way  of  the  Spirit  in  producing 
them,  it  must  often  be  said,  as  our  Saviour  has  said  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  that  it  "  cometh  not  with  observation,"  Lk.  xvii.  20.  If 
extra  meetings  are  necessary  for  immediate  manifestations  of  divine 
grace  on  the  ground  that  the  stated  services  of  the  Church  are  in- 
adequate to  its  development,  we  might  consistently  apply  the  same 
principle  to  the  curriculum  of  education  in  theological  seminaries. 
Experience  in  such  institutions,  however,  proves  that  a  systematic 
course  of  study  of  divine  truth  statedly  and  faithfully  administered, 
does  not  require  a  periodical  continuity  of  intense  application  for 
several  weeks,  in  order  to  a  healthful  intellectual  development  of  the 
students,  but  that  this  end  is  best  attained  when  there  is  a  regular 
and  equitable  distribution  of  recitations  throughout  the  academic 
year.  If  the  stated  public  administration  of  the  word  to  adults, 
twice  on  the  Lord's  day  and  once  in  the  midst  of  the  week,  and  the 
administration  of  baptism  as  a  means  of  regeneration  for  infants 
with  their  subsequent  catechetical  instruction  as  a  preparation  for 
communicant  membership,  together  with  the  administration  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  to  adults  as  a  means  of  sanctification,  have  been 
designated  by  almost  uniform  and  constant  observance,  in  the  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Church,  and  have  proven  through  experience,  when 
faithfully  observed,  to  be  adequate  for  the  development  of  the  Church 
in  harmony  with  the  will  ^of  God,  it  would  seem  that  the  Church 
should  apply  her  force  and  fidelity  to  these  stated  and  established 
opportunities,  rather  than  ignore  their  sufficiency  by  a  reliance  upon 
the  periodical  revival. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  567 

II.  Modes  of  Service  in  the  Sanctuary. 

It  is  the  function  of  the  human  agency  in  the  development  of  the 
Church  not  only  to  designate  the  times  of  ecclesiastical  service,  but 
likewise  to  regulate  the  mode  of  its  administration.  This  aspect  of 
human  ordinances  in  the  Church  has  much  significance.  The  char- 
acter of  the  Church  is  illustrated  and  its  spirit  is  revealed  by  the 
manner  of  its  service  in  the  sanctuary.  Divine  service  in  the  sanc- 
tuary consists  of  two  essentially  distinct  parts:  (i)  The  worship  of 
God ;  (2)  The  administration  of  the  means  of  grace. 

a.  Principles  of  the  Cnltns. — With  respect  to  public  worship, 
Olshausen*  observes:  "The  element  of  adoration,  with  spurious 
objectiveness,  has  acquired  in  the  Roman  Church,  an  undue  pre- 
dominance, while  in  the  Reformed  Church  with  spurious  sub- 
jectiveness,  the  preacher  and  his  discourse  have  too  much  sup- 
planted the  element  of  adoration.  The  middle  course  is  the  right 
one,  and  it  requires  the  two  to  be  so  distributed  that  the  minister 
may  stand  forth  not  only  in  his  subjectiveness  as  a  teacher,  but  also 
as  the  organ  through  which  the  adoration  of  the  Church  receives 
expression."  Dr.  Hofling,  in  an  article  on  "  The  Principles  of  the 
Cultus  of  the  Evangelical  Church,"  f  presents  five  principles  as  con- 
stituting liturgical  action,  which  may  be  characterized  by  the  terms, 
truth,  freedom,  generality,  decorum  and  solemnity.  With  respect 
to  truth  he  says:  "The  only  objectively  true  and  Evangelical  faith 
of  the  Bible  in  redemption  is  just  as  truly  expressed  as  it  is  appealed 
to  by  the  cultus."  Of  freedom  he  says:  "There  is  no  ceremonial 
law  of  the  New  Testament ;  the  acts  of  the  cultus  do  not  possess 
a  character  of  external  works  commanded  of  God,  *  *  the  con- 
sciences of  believers  are  not  bound  by  this  or  that  form  of  e.xternal 
worship,  and  the  order  of  worship  becomes  an  intolerable  command- 
ment of  men,  as  soon  as  it  is  claimed  to  be  a  necessary  element  of 
the  divine  order  of  salvation."  Of  generality  he  says:  "The  Chris- 
tian cultus  is  no  merely  individual,  subjective  or  private  worship, 
but  public,  common,  and  churchly.  Its  subject  is  not  the  individ- 
ual believer  per  se,  but  the  congregation  of  believers.  Hence  we 
infer  that  the  merely  individual  and  subjective  understanding  of  the 
Scriptures  cannot  be  enforced,  nolens  volens,  as  objective  truth,  but 

*  Com.  Acts  ii.  42-47,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  393,  trans,  by  Lindsay. 

t  Translated  by  Rev.  H.  S.  Lasar,  Ev.  Rev.  Vol.  X.,  p.  232,  sq. 


568  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

wholly  the  common  interpretation  of  the  Church  ;  and  that  the  pri- 
vate faith  of  the  individual  subject  cannot  lay  claim  to  be  exhibited 
in  the  cultus,  but  the  faith  of  the  congregation."  In  reference  to  the 
relation  of  the  worship  of  a  local  congregation  to  that  of  the  total, 
after  quoting  the  Seventh  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  that 
"  it  is  not  necessary  to  the  true  unity  of  the  Christian  Church  that 
uniform  traditions,  rites  and  ceremonies  of  human  appointment, 
should  be  everywhere  observed,"  and  that  "  it  is  sufficient  that  the 
gospel  be  rightly  preached  and  the  sacraments  rightly  administered," 
Dr.  Hofling  adds,  that  "  the  requisition  that  the  worship  of  God 
should  bear  a  churchly  common  character,  that  all  the  local  con- 
gregations should  agree,  refers,  especially  *  *  to  those  acts  in 
which,  not  so  much  the  local  as  the  total  congregation  is  seen  to 
act  by  the  organ  of  her  called  servants  in  the  name  of  God."  It  is 
not  designed,  however,  by  this  principle,  to  neglect  or  ignore  in  any 
respect  the  spiritual  wants  and  experience  of  the  individual  and 
of  local  congregations  in  public  worship,  but  simply  that  the  faith 
and  worship  of  the  Church  in  general  should  be  preeminently 
exhibited,  as  we  shall  observe  more  particularly  hereafter.  In  refer- 
ence to  the  fourth  principle,  decorum,  he  says  :  "A  form  of  public  and 
common  action,  like  that  of  the  cultus,  cannot  and  dare  not  refuse 
to  submit  to  the  rule  of  the  general  moral  law  of  order  and  decency; 
will  not  sacrifice  the  proper  organization  and  orderly  course  of  such 
action  to  accident  or  the  option  of  a  few  individuals.  *  *  The 
several  parts  must  be  united  to  an  organic  whole,  and  the  different 
acts  follow  in  such  a  succession  as  characterizes  the  nature  and  end 
of  common  worship.  *  *  The  chief  requisitions  of  this  principle 
are  the  exactness  in  the  time  and  place,  as  well  as  the  order  and 
course  of  worship,  the  proper  distribution  of  the  different  functions, 
and  especially  the  provision  made  of  particular  organs  to  direct  cul- 
tus-action."  In  reference  to  the  fifth  principle,  solemnity,  he  says  : 
"  Cultus  action  cannot  dispense  with  beauty  and  art,  its  end  being 
to  afford  an  expression  to  be  perceived  by  the  senses  of  something 
spiritual,  and  to  keep  everything  distant  that  is  low  and  common,  all 
that  is  sensuous,  impure  and  unworthy,  or  merely  sensuous  and  not 
a  reflex  of  the  spiritual.  But  as  little  as  the  contents  of  the  cultus 
is  the  spiritual  and  ideal  generally,  just  so  little  can  liturgical  action 
be  identical  with  artistic  action  generally,  or  beauty  be  its  highest 
law.    There  is  an  immense,  a  specific  difference  between  profane  and 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  569 

sacred  art.  Profane  art  never  advances  higher  than  a  rehgious  con- 
templation of  the  world,  but  true  churchly  art  is  the  representation 
of  the  divine,  apprehended  in  the  natural  contemplation  of  God  for 
the  end  of  common  devotion.  The  spiritual,  as  the  contents  of  the 
cultus  and  calculated  for  the  senses,  *  *  is  that  which  is  holy 
per  sc.  It  being  brought  to  exhibit  itself  directly  in  a  proper  man- 
ner, its  result  is  not  the  beautiful,  but  the  solemn.  All  liturgical 
action  will  correspond  with  this  principle,  if  in  it  the  arts  are  dis- 
robed of  all  their  own  natural  ideal  contents,  renouncing  all  efforts 
by  their  dexterity  and  skill  to  please;  if  they  serve  but  the  sacred 
object  they  are  to  represent,  both  respecting  form  and  contents,  and 
appear  as  entirely  devoted  to  and  exclusively  determined  by  it,  in 
their  production."  The  author  then  adds  respecting  these  principles  : 
"  The  less  isolated  they  cooperate  and  the  greater  their  harmonious 
union  and  mutual  interpenetration,  the  more  living,  the  more  pleas- 
ing in  every  direction  and  the  more  perfectly  satisfactory  will  the 
cultus.  appear.  No  one  element  of  religion  and  piety  will  make  it- 
self felt  at  the  expense  and  exclusion  of  the  others.  *  *  On  the 
mutual  mediation  of  these,  *  *  on  their  resolution  into  a  higher 
unity,  and  not  upon  their  displacing  and  excluding  each  other,  de- 
pends chiefly  the  living  character  of  the  cultus." 

b.  General  Synod's  Order  of  Public  Worship.  Accepting  these 
principles  and  guided  by  them,  our  General  Synod  formulates  and 
presents  in  the  Book  of  Worship,  an  order  of  public  service  in  the 
sanctuary,  in  the  observance  of  which  the  objective  truth  of  the 
divine  word,  which  is  essential  in  true  worship,  is  manifested  every 
Lord's  day  in  the  morning  service;  thus  conforming  to  the  first 
principle  of  liturgical  action.  The  non-observance  of  this  ritual  as 
a  privilege  of  the  local  congregation,  may  serve  to  illustrate  the 
second  of  the  foregoing  principles,  viz.  freedom;  for  thus  it  appears 
that  "the  consciences  of  believers  are  not  bound  by  this  or  that 
form  of  external  worship,"  nor  does  the  order  of  worship  become 
"an  intolerable  command  of  men,"  as  though  an  unalterable  liturgi- 
cal service  was  "  a  necessary  element  of  the  divine  order  of  salva- 
tion." The  order  of  public  worship  on  the  Lord's  day  at  the  morn- 
ing service  also  recognizes  the  third  principle,  termed  generality,  by 
which  the  local  congregation  exhibits  the  fiith  and  worship  of  the 
Church  in  general.  Whilst  each  of  the  five  liturgical  principles 
referred  to  has  its  special  significance  and  value,  the  third  principle. 


570  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

named  generality,  especially  furnishes  an  argument  of  much  force 
for  the  use  of  a  liturgical  form  of  worship.  That  principle  requires 
that  the  local  congregation  shall  adequately  express  the  faith  and 
worship  of  the  general  or  total  Church.  A  prescribed  formula  by 
which  the  total  church  is  assured  that  her  own  faith  and  worship, 
and  not  the  subjective  views  or  feelings  of  the  individual  minister 
or  local  congregation  are  expressed,  is  therefore  a  necessity.  An 
examination  of  the  Order  of  Service,  in  the  Book  of  Worship,  will 
show  that  the  first  acts  of  service  by  the  local  congregation  are  an 
exhibition  and  confession  of  the  faith  and  devotion  of  the  Church  in 
general.  The  Confession  of  Sin,  the  Introits,  the  Gloria  Patri,  con- 
cluding with  the  Kyrie  Eleeison,  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis,  and  the 
Confession  of  Faith  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  embody  not  simply  the 
worship  and  faith  of  the  individual  Christian  or  congregation  ;  but 
especially  is  the  Church  catholic  represented  in  all  the  essential 
aspects  of  her  faith  and  worship.  There  is  perhaps  ground  for  a 
minor  criticism,  that  there  is  incompleteness  in  our  order  of  service 
by  the  omission  of  rubrics  to  direct  the  congregation  in  the  use  of 
the  liturgy;  also  by  the  omission  of  the  declaration  of  absolution, 
which  seems  appropriate  after  the  Confession  of  Sin  and  the  Kyrie. 
For  as  the  Church  in  general  practically  and  appropriately  illustrates 
her  faith  in  the  confession  of  sin,  there  would  be  conformity  to  good 
order  and  truth  by  practically  and  appropriately  illustrating  her 
faith  in  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  which  indeed  she  professes  in  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  but  which  is  not  announced  to  the  believing  peni- 
tent. The  Twenty-fifth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  says  : 
"  Our  preachers  diligently  teach  that  confession  should  be  retained 
for  the  sake  of  absolution,  which  is  the  principal  and  most  valuable 
thing  in  it,  to  bring  consolation  to  alarmed  consciences,  as  well  as 
for  several  other  reasons."  It  is  also  doubtful  whether  it  was  an 
improvement  to  substitute  the  indefinite  expression  in  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  "  He,  descended  into  the  place  of  departed  spirits,"  for  the 
phrase,  "  He  descended  into  Hell."  Certainly  it  is  the  doctrine  of 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  as  stated  by  Luther,  according  to 
the  Formula  of  Concord  (IX.),  "  that  the  whole  person,  God  and 
man,  after  his  burial,  descended  into  hell,  and  destroyed  its  power." 
Thus  it  is  also  stated  in  Luther's  Smaller  Catechism,  in  the  Apos- 
tles' Creed,  that  Christ  "descended  into  hell."  The  reading  of  the 
Pericopes  designated  in  the  ecclesiastical  calendar,  also  harmonizes 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  57 1 

with  proper  liturgical  action,  if  there  is  an  observance  of  the  Chris- 
tian year.  The  importance  of  the  principle  that  the  local  church 
should  represent  the  objective  faith  and  worship  of  the  total  Church, 
is  not,  however,  by  any  means  designed  to  ignore  the  subjective 
wants  or  necessities  of  the  individual  or  of  the  local  congregation; 
indeed,  as  integral  constituents  of  the  entire  Church,  they  must  indi- 
vidually experience  the  common  faith  and  devotion  which  they 
represent.  But  beyond  the  individual  experience,  in  the  common 
worship,  the  service  of  the  sanctuary  provides  for  the  spiritual  wants 
of  the  individual  and  of  the  local  congregation,  by  the  opportunity 
for  extemporaneous  prayer  and  for  hymns  adapted  to  special  wants 
or  occasions.  The  sermon,  likewise,  which  is  the  prominent  part 
of  divine  service,  is  usually  delivered  statedly  three  times  during  the 
week,  and  thereby  opportunity  is  given  not  only  for  the  considera- 
tion of  topics  suggested  by  the  Christian  year,  but  likewise  by  indi- 
vidual or  congregational  experience.  This  recognition  of  that  which 
is  public,  common  and  churchly,  and  likewise  of  that  which  is  indi- 
vidual, subjective  and  local,  pertains  to  the  cultus  of  the  General 
Synod;  which  has  "preserved  the  continuity  of  the  past  life  of  the 
Church  with  the  present,  in  the  adoption  of  forms,  sacred  through 
long  association,  and  in  making  provision  at  the  same  time  for  the 
peculiar  needs  of  the  hour  in  unwritten  prayers."* 

c.  Art  in  Worship.  It  was  observed  in  the  fifth  liturgical  prin- 
ciple, that  "  cultus  action  cannot  dispense  with  beauty  and  art,  its 
end  being  to  afford  an  expression  to  be  perceived  by  the  senses  of 
something  spiritual;  but  as  liturgical  action  is  not  identical  with 
artistic  action,  "the  arts  must  serve  the  sacred  objects  they  represent^ 
and  appear  as  entirely  devoted  to  it."  Guided  by  this  principle,  the 
aesthetic  judgment  constructs  and  adorns  the  sanctuary,  so  that  the 
external  associations  of  divine  service  may  awaken  and  cherish  a 
truly  devotional  spirit;  it  avoids,  on  the  one  hand,  a  gaudy  mere- 
tricious taste,  which  ministers  to  pride  and  vanity;  and  on  the  other, 
that  bald  simplicity  which  does  not  apprehend  the  nature  nor  power 
of  sacred  art.  The  true  ethical  and  aesthetic  judgment  discards  all 
melodies  in  divine  service,  which  simply  please  the  sensuous  taste, 
or  draw  attention  to  the  artistic  skill  of  the  performer,  yet  fail  to 
awaken  true  devotion  in  the  soul,  and  which,  however  appropriate 

*L.  E.  Albert,  D.  D.,  Lutheran  Diet,  1877,  p.  272. 


572  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

elsewhere,  are  incongruous  with  the  solemn  associations  of  the 
house  of  God.  It  forbids  all  sensationalism,  and  whilst  it  requires 
eloquence  and  art  in  the  ministry  of  the  word,  they  must  be  con- 
cealed in  the  pre-eminent  appearance  and  power  of  the  truth.  It 
makes  a  distinction  to  the  eye,  between  the  worship  of  God  and  the 
administration  of  his  word,  when  the  minister  conducts  the  liturg- 
ical service  in  the  chancel  and  delivers  the  sermon  from  the  pulpit ; 
and  it  is  in  conformity  with  a  right  liturgical  form  of  public  service 
in  the  sanctuary  that  the  officiating  minister  should  wear  a  distinc- 
tive robe  in  the  performance  of  his  official  work.  A  plain  vestment 
of  black,  unlike  the  gaudy  robes  of  the  Roman  priest,  serves  to 
identify  the  character  of  the  minister  and  his  office,  and  to  impress 
upon  the  people  the  solemnit)'  of  the  divine  service  in  which  they 
engage.  Rev.  John  Hall,  D.  D.,  an  eminent  Presbyterian  clergy- 
man of  New  York  city,  says :  "  It  does  not  follow,  because  a  preacher 
is  not  a  priest,  that  he  is  nothing  but  a  paid  speaker,  or  leader,  or 
lecturer.  He  is  an  ambassador  of  Christ,  a  minister  of  the  gospel, 
a  commissioned  officer  in  the  Lord's  sacramental  host,  called  of  God 
before  he  was  called  by  the  people  of  his  particular  charge;  and 
whatever  in  dress  or  address  will  keep  this  in  his  own  mind  and  in 
the  mind  of  his -people  and  the  community,  is  not  quite  despicable. 
In  the  recoil  from  dead  officialism  in  some  parts  of  the  country,  it 
has  been  accepted  as  the  proper  thing  for  a  clergyman  to  avoid,  in 
some  degree,  any  distinctive  professional  characteristics.  This,  how- 
ever, may,  like  all  reactions,  be  carried  to  the  point  where  some  evil 
begins  ;  and  it  is  just  where  this  policy  has  ruled,  and  where  sacred 
things  are  habitually  divested  of  all  sacred  concomitants,  that  we 
should  look  for  another  and  opposite  reaction  in  favor  of  a  florid  or 
stately  service."*  Jacobson,  in  Herzog's  Real  Encyclopaedia,  vol, 
7,  p.  734,  under  Art.  Kleider  und  Insignien,  says  that  "  ministers  in 
the  first  centuries  in  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  life  did  not  distin- 
guish themselves  from  the  people  by  their  clothing,  but  beyond 
doubt  they  did  so  in  the  performance  of  their  official  acts."t  And 
we  may  observe  in  the  portraits  of  many  eminent  ministers  of  vari- 
ous Protestant  churches,  since  the  days  of  the  Reformation,  that  they 
are  represented  with  a  distinctive  clerical  apparel. 

*  Princeton  Review,  Mar.  1878,  p.  354. 

f  Im  gemein  verkehr  unterschieden  sich  aber  in  den  ersten  Jahrhunderten 
die  Beamten,  dann  der  Klerus  von  dem  Volke  in  der  Kleidung  nicht,  wogegen 
dies  ohne  Zweifel  bei  Amtsverrichtungen  geschah. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  573 

III.  Constitution  and  Administration  of  Government. 

Thus  far  the  application  of  the  principles  regulating  human  ordin- 
ances has  been  made  to  tiincs  and  modes  of  divine  service.  Another 
distinct  function  of  the  human  agency  which  claims  attention  is  the 
constitution  and  administration  of  government  in  the  Church. 

a.  Relation  betzveen  CJmrch  and  State.  A  preliminary  reference 
to  the  relation  between  Church  and  State  will  not  require  an  ex- 
tended discussion;  inasmuch  as  it  is  a  fundamental  law  of  this  nation, 
with  which  the  public  sentiment  accords,  that  the  State  cannot  of- 
ficially cooperate  with  the  Church  in  its  government  or  development. 

The  first  Amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  de- 
clares that  "  Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment 
of  religion  or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof"     The  Church 
and  State  are  alike  divinely  ordained  institutions  for   the  welfare  of 
humanity,  and  each  has  its  distinct  sphere  and  object,  yet  they  are 
by  no  means  absolutely  independent  of  each  other.     Whilst  it  is  ex- 
clusively the  function  of  the  State  to  protect  life  and  property,  and 
of  the  Church  to  administer  the  means  of  divine  grace  for  the  salva- 
tion of  men,  yet  there  is  reciprocal  protection.     The  State  is  the 
guardian  of  the  Church,  so  that  in  its  free  development,  "no  one 
dares  to  molest  it  or  make  it  afraid,"  a  blessing  which  we  need  not 
go  far  back  in  history  to  learn  to  appreciate.     We  have  but  to  recall 
the  "  Thirty  Years'  War,"  which  desolated  Germany,  and  the  trials 
of  England  under  Queen  Mary  and  King  James  II.      The  principle 
that  the  Church  shall  not  be  persecuted  for  its  faith  was  completely 
settled,  and   we  trust   forever,  by  the  victory  of  the  Protestants  at 
Lutzen  in  1632,  associated  with  the  heroic  martyrdom  of  Gustavus 
Adolphus,  and   by  the  English  revolution  of  1688.     On  the  other 
hand,  the  Church  is  the  true  guardian  of  the  State.     The  spirit  of 
Christianity  as  well  as  its  precepts  educate  the  citizen  to  loyalty, 
industry,  and  humanity.      These  are  the   best  standing  army  of  a 
nation ;  and  it   needs  no  prophet's  eye   to  discern   that  the  hope  of 
perpetuating  our  noble   civil  government  must  rest  upon  the  intelli- 
gence and  piety  of  the  people.     "  The  nation  that  forgets  God  shall 
perish."     This  obligation  of  the  Church  to  infuse  its  faith  into  the 
State  by  no  means  implies  that  there  should  be  any  organic  union 
between  them,  nor  that  the  faith  of  the  Church  should  be  formally 
engrafted   upon   the  constitutional    law  of  the  State.     Our  country 
affords  an  illustrious  example  to  the  nations  of  Europe  which   yet 


574  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

perpetuate  an  organic  union  of  Church  and  State,  that  the  Church  can 
be  faithful  to  her  calhng  in  her  own  sphere,  distinct  from  organic 
union  with  civil  government,  and  thereby  aid  the  State  and  receive 
its  protection  in  return.  And  whilst  she  has  wisely  refrained  from 
attempting  to  exhibit  her  confession  of  faith  in  the  national  constitu- 
tion, she  has,  to  some  extent,  developed  in  its  subjects  the  righteous- 
ness which  "  exalteth  a  nation." 

b.  Specific  Forms  of  CJiurcJi  Govcnnncnt :  Papal ;  Episcopal ;  Pres- 
byterian: Congregational ;  Evangelical  Lntheran.  Of  more  imme- 
diate practical  interest  and  importance  to  us  than  the  relation  be- 
tween Church,  and  State,  is  the  constitution  and  administration  of 
government  in  the  Church;  inasmuch  as  the  subjective  views  of 
men,  herein,  again  widely  differ  in  the  application  of  the  principles 
regulating  human  ordinances  in  the  Church.  Such  importance  per- 
tains to  modes  of  constituting  government  in  the  Church,  that  th^y 
serve  in  a  great  measure  to  mark  and  identify  several  of  the  great 
denominations  of  Christendom.  Four  different  forms  of  government 
exist  in  the  Christian  Church  in  this  land,  viz.:  the  Papal,  the  Epis- 
copal, the  Presbyterian,  and  the  Congregational,  representing  re- 
spectively monarchical,  aristocratic,  representative  and  democratic 
ideas  of  government.  The  papal  form  of  government  is  indeed 
administered  by  a  body  of  clergy  of  different  ranks  and  orders,  but 
of  this  hierarchy  the  pope  or  bishop  of  Rome  is  regarded  as  the 
supreme  head  of  the  visible  Church,  who  in  his  official  capacity  is 
infallible  in  his  judgment  and  absolute  in  his  authority.  The  Episco- 
pal form  of  government  in  the  Protestant  Church  involves  the  prin- 
cipal that  a  succession  from  the  Apostles  in  the  order  of  bishops,  as 
an  order  distinct  from  and  superior  to  those  who  are  called  presby- 
ters or  teaching  elders  in  the  Church,  is  a  requisite  without  which  a 
valid  Christian  ministry  cannot  be  preserved.  The  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church  discards  the  principle  of  an  apostolic  succession  as 
necessary  to  a  valid  ministry,  but  "  regards  episcopacy  as  essential 
to  the  itineracy."  *  A  third  form  of  government  in  the  Church, 
called  the  Presbyterian,  maintains  "that  as  to  the  bishops  and  pres- 
byters, the  Holy  Scriptures  make  no  difference  between  them,"  but 
that  "all  ministers  of  the  gospel,  although  described  by  different 
names   and    titles,   which    designate  their  various  functions,  are  of 

*  J.  F.  Crane,  D.  D.,  Methodism  and  its  Methods,  p.  1S5. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  575 

equal  rank."  This  form  of  government  holds  that  it  is  "agreeable  to 
the  Scriptures  that  the  Church  be  governed  by  congregational,  pres- 
byterial,  and  synodical  assemblies."  *  The  Presbyterian  organisa- 
tion is  thus  set  forth  in  the  "Westminster  Confession  of  Faith," 
1647,  chap.  31  :t 

Sec.  I.  "For  the  better  government  and  further  edification  of  the 
Church,  there  ought  to  be  such  assemblies  as  are  currently  called 
synods  or  councils."  The  American  edition  here  adds:  "Audit 
belongeth  to  the  overseers  and  other  rulers  of  tlie  particular  churches, 
by  virtue  of  their  office  and  the  power  which  Christ  hath  given 
them  for  edification  and  not  for  destruction,  to  appoint  such  assem- 
blies, and  to  convene  together  in  them,  as  often  as  they  shall  judge 
it  expedient  for  the  good  of  the  Church.     Acts  xv.  22,  23,  25. 

Sec.  2.  "  It  belongeth  to  synods  and  councils,  ministerially,  to  de- 
termine controversies  of  faith  and  cases  of  conscience,  to  set  down 
rules  and  directions  for  the  better  ordering  of  the  public  worship  of 
God  and  government  of  his  Church;  to  receive  complaints  in  cases 
of  maladministration,  and  authoritatively  to  determine  the  same  ; 
which  decrees  and  determinations,  if  consonant  with  the  word  of 
God,  are  to  be  received  with  reverence  and  submission,  not  only  for 
their  agreement  with  the  word,  but  also  for  the  power  whereby  they 
are  made,  as  being  an  ordinance  of' God,  appointed  thereunto  in  his 
word." 

A  fourth  form  of  government  is  the  Congregational.  Those  who 
adopt  it  "  agree  in  the  belief  that  the  right  of  government  resides  in 
local  churches  or  congregations  of  believers,  who  are  responsible 
directly  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  one  Head  of  the  Church  uni- 
versal, and  of  all  particular  churches."  |  Let  us  briefly  estimate  the 
value  of  each  of  these  forms  of  government  as  human  ordinances, 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  With 
respect  to  the  primacy  of  Peter,  it  is  taught  and  declaretl  in  the 
"  Dogmatic  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council,  1870,"  chap,  i,  "that 
according  to  the  testimony  of  the  gospel  the  primacy  of  jurisdiction 
over  the  universal  Church  of  God  was   immediately  and   divinely 

*J.  M.  Krebs,  D.  D.,  Art.  Presbyterian  Church,  in  Rupp's  Hist,  of  Relig. 
Denom.  in  U.  S.,  p.  567. 

f  Schaff's  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  III.,  p.  669. 

X  Declaration  of  the  National  Congregational  Council  at  Oberlin,  O.,  1871,  in 
Schaff's  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Yo\.  III.,  p.  737. 


576  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

promised  and  given  to  blessed  Peter  the  apostle,  by  Christ,  the 
Lord."*  With  respect  to  the  primacy  of  the  Pope,  his  alleged 
successors,  the  following  canon  occurs  in  ch.  2  :  "If  then  any  should 
deny  that  it  is  by  the  institution  of  Christ,  the  Lord,  or  by  divine 
right,  that  blessed  Peter  should  have  a  perpetual  line  of  successors 
in  the  primacy  over  the  universal  Church,  or  that  the  Roman  pontiff 
is  the  successor  of  blessed  Peter  in  this  primacy,  let  him  be  anathe- 
ma." With  respect  to  the  power  of  the  Roman  pontiff,  it  is  taught 
and  declared  in  ch.  3,  "that  by  the  appointment  of  our  Lord,  the 
Roman  Church  possesses  a  superiority  of  ordinary  power  over  all 
other  churches,  and  that  this  power  of  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  pon- 
tiff, which  is  truly  episcopal,  is  immediate,  to  which  all,  of  whatever 
rank  and  dignity,  both  pastors  and  faithful,  both  individually  and 
collectively,  are  bound  by  their  duty  of  hierarchical  subordination  and 
true  obedience  to  submit,  not  only  in  matters  which  belong  to  faith  and 
morals,  but  also  in  those  that  appertain  to  the  discipline  and  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  throughout  the  world,  so  that  the  Church  of  Christ 
maybe  one  flock  under  one  supreme  pastor,  through  the  preservation 
of  unity,  both  of  communion  and  of  profession  of  the  same  faith  with 
the  Roman  pontiff  This  is  the  teaching  of  Catholic  truth,  from 
which  no  one  can  deviate  without  loss  of  faith  and  salvation."  The 
Roman  Church  claims  this  supreme  authority  for  the  Roman  pon- 
tiff, the  alleged  successor  of  Peter,  as  a  divine  right,  on  the  ground 
that  the  following  passage  of  Scripture,  among  others,  confers  it, 
Matt.  xvi.  18,  19.  Christ  said  to  Peter  :  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon 
this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not 
prevail  against  it.  And  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be 
bound  in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  shall 
be  loosed  in  heaven."  The  Protestant  churches  regard  it  essential 
to  the  right  interpretation  of  this  passage  of  Scripture,  that  the 
words  of  Christ  to  Peter  be  referred  not  to  the  person  of  Peter,  but 
to  the  answer  which  Peter  gave  to  the  question  which  Christ  asked 
all  the  disciples,  "  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am  ?"  After  the  inadequate 
answers  of  some,  Peter  correctly  replies,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God."  That  confession  of  Peter  is  the  rock  upon 
which  Christ  has  built  his  Church.     In  Matt,  xviii.  18,  Christ  says 


*  Schaff's  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  II.,  p.  167,  sq. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH,  577 

to  all  the  disciples,  what  he  had  said  to  Peter:  "Whatsoever  ye 
shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,"  etc.  The  power  of 
the  keys,  which  it  is  alleged  Christ  gave  to  none  but  Peter,  can  only 
mean  the  office  through  which  the  promise  of  the  Gospel  is  imparted 
to  every  one  that  desires  it;  yet  this  power,  Christ  expressly  said, 
pertained  to  the  whole  Church  ;  for  after  unavailing  efforts  to  recon- 
cile an  offending  brother,  Christ  directs  that  the  difficulty  shall  be 
referred  to  the  Church,  and  if  the  offender  neglects  to  hear  the 
Church,  "let  him  be  unto  thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  a  publican." 
The  office  of  the  keys  was  again  bestowed  not  upon  Peter  but  upon 
the  disciples  on  the  resurrection  day;  "Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit, 
they  are  remitted  unto  them;  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they 
are  retained,"  John  xx.  23.  Paul  places  himself  on  an  equality  with 
Peter  with  respect  to  his  office :  "  For  he  that  wrought  effectually  in 
Peter  to  the  apostleship  of  the  circumcision,  the  same  was  mighty 
in  me  toward  the  Gentiles,"  Gal.  ii.  8  ;  and  he  ascribes  to  divine  grace 
the  ability  to  accomplish  a  greater  work  than  any  of  the  apostles  ; 
indeed,  he  declares  that  he  withstood  Peter  to  his  face,  because  he 
was  to  be  blamed  for  dissembling  with  the  Jews.  But  if  Peter  had 
any  primacy  of  office  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  Paul  would 
have  here  recognized  it.  On  the  night  of  his  betrayal,  Christ  taught 
the  apostles,  disputing  among  themselves  who  of  them  ought  to  be 
regarded  as  the  vicar  of  Christ  after  his  death,  that  he  wanted  no 
primacy  among  them.  "  The  kings  of  the  Gentiles  exercise  lord- 
ship over  them,  but  so  shall  it  not  be  among  you."  Yet  again  we 
read  that  "  the  Council  of  Nice,  (325)  resolved  that  the  bishop  or 
pastor  of  Alexandria  should  provide  for  the  Churches  in  the  East, 
and  the  bishop  or  pastor  of  Rome  for  those  in  the  West,"*  showing 
the  supremacy  of  the  Church  over  the  bishops,  and  denying  the 
primacy  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  over  all  others.  For  these  among 
other  reasons  the  Protestant  Church  rejects  the  dogma  that  a  proper 
constitution  of  the  government  of  the  Church  must  recognize  the 
Pope  by  divine  right  as  the  supreme  head  and  ruler  of  the  Church, 
This  article  of  the  Roman  Church,  says  Luther,  "  we  hold  and  know 
to  be  false,  impious,  tyrannical  and  pernicious  in  the  extreme  to  the 
Christian    Church. "f       Respecting    the    infallible    teaching    of    the 

*  Appendi.x  to  Smalcald  Articles,  VI, 
t  Book  of  Concord,  Eng.  Ed.,  p.  392. 


578  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Roman  pontiff,  it  is  said  in  ch.  4  of  the  "  Dogmatic  Decrees  of  the 
Vatican  Council,  1870,"*  "We  teach  and  define  that  it  is  a  dogma 
divinely  revealed  that  the  Roman  pontiff,  when  he  speaks  ex  cathe- 
dra, that  is,  when  in  discharge  of  the  office  of  pastor  and  doctor  of 
all  Christians  by  virtue  of  his  supreme  apostolic  authority,  he  defines 
a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or  morals  to  be  held  by  the  universal 
Church,  by  the  divine  assistance  promised  to  him  in  blessed  Peter, 
is  possessed  of  that  infallibility  with  which  the  divine  Redeemer 
willed  that  his  Church  should  be  endowed  for  defining  doctrine,  re- 
garding faith  or  morals ;  and  that  therefore  such  definitions  of  the 
Roman  pontiff  are  irreformable  of  themselves,  and  not  from  the 
consent  of  the  Church."  An  illustration  of  papal  "infallibility" 
occurs  in  the  decree  of  Pope  Paul  V.  (1616),  confirmed  by  his  suc- 
cessor, Urban  VIII.,  that  Galileo's  propositions  (i)  "that  the  earth 
moves  around  the  sun,"  and  (2)  "that  the  earth  has  a  diurnal  motion 
of  rotation,"  are  "  heretical,"  i.  e.,  contrary  to  the  teaching  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  "  erroneous  as  to  faith. "f  Of  this  dogma  of  papal  infalli- 
bility, a  learned  pontiff,  of  irreproachable  morals,  viz.,  Adrian  VI., 
says,  in  a  book  reprinted  at  Rome  in  1522,  during  his  pontificate, 
that  "  it  is  certain  that  the  Pope  may  err  in  matters  of  faith  in  de- 
fending heresy  by  his  opinions  or  decretals."  D'Aubigne,  giving 
the  original  of  these  words  and  the  reference,  says  :  "  If  the  Ultra- 
montanists  reply  that  Adrian  was  mistaken  on  this  point,  by  this 
very  circumstance  they  affirm,  what  they  deny,  namely,  the  fallibility 
of  the  popes."  I 

With  respect  to  the  Episcopal  form  of  government,  in  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church,  it  is  to  be  said  that  "some  have  recognized 
in  Episcopacy  an  institution  of  divine  origin,  which  is  absolute  and 
indispensable;  others  have  represented  it  as  destitute  of  all  apostolic 
sanction  and  authority. "§  According  to  the  former  view,  no 
Christian  community  can  have  a  right  to  claim  to  be  considered  in 
the  true  sense  a  branch  of  the  Church  catholic  or  universal,  if  it 

*Schafif's  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  II.,  p.  271. 

t  Miss  Clark's  life  of  Galileo,  Ency.  Brit.,  9th  Edit. 

t  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  3,  p.  152,  Am.  Tract  Soc.  Ed. 

"Certum  est  quod  Pontifex  potuit  errare  in  iis  quae  tangunt  fidem,  haeresim 
per  suam  determinationem  aut  decretalem  asserendo. — Comm,  in  lib.  4,  Senten- 
tiarum  Quest,  de  Sacr.  Confirm.,  Romae,  1522,  fol. 

I  Dr.  Lightfoot,  quoted  in  Art.  Episcopacy,  in  Ency.  Brit.,  9th  Edit. 


HUMAN  ORDINANCES  IN  THE  CHURCH.        579 

have  not  episcopal  organization.  The  latter  view  considers  Episco- 
pacy desirable  to  the  good  government  of  the  Church,  and  to  the 
maintainance  of  Evangelical  truth  and  apostolic  order,  but  not  es- 
sential to  its  existence.  It  is  evident,  indeed  it  is  conceded  by  advo- 
cates of  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy,  that  the  offices  of  bishop 
and  of  presbyter  in  the  New  Testament  are  identical.*  Thus  the 
presbyters  or  elders  of  the  Ephesian  Church  summoned  by  St. 
Paul  to  meet  him  at  Miletus,  Acts.  xx.  17,  {/nEremMcaTo  rova  Tzpeai3v-£povg,) 
are,  in  v.  28,  designate  by  him  bishops  or  "overseers"  of  the  flock 

{^ev  u  vfiag  TO  nvev/xa  Todyiov  e-&eTO  EKiaK07rov<;.)       Paul    directs    iltUS    tO    Ordain 

elders.  Tit.  i.  5,  {mraaT^ayg  npEa,3vTepovc,)  and  in  the  second  verse  follow- 
ing, in  describing  their  qualifications,  he  calls  them  bishops,  v.  7, 
(fieiyap  rov  knioKonov  avh/K/a^ov  eh'ai).  The  Same  thing  occurs  in  liis  epis- 
tle to  Timothy,  I  Tim.  iii.  i,  when  he  describes  the  qualification  of 
a  bishop  for  ruling  well,  (h  nq  tTricKorr^g  bpiyerai,)  and  then  in  chap,  v., 
V.  17,  calls  those  who  rule  well  "  elders,"  {ol  KuAug  tvpoegtuteq  TrpEaiS'vTEpoi.) 
"  Any  conclusion,  therefore,  drawn  from  the  use  of  the  term  '  bishop ' 
in  the  New  Testament,  as  to  the  existence  of  the  episcopal  office,  as 
an  office  of  superior  rank  or  authority  to  the  office  of  presbyter  or 
elder,  would  be  fallacious."!  The  office  of  the  apostles  was  indeed 
of  superior  rank  and  power  to  that  of  elders  or  bishops ;  but  as  the 
apostles  were  especially  called,  inspired  and  endowed  with  miracu- 
lous gifts,  so  we  may  believe,  particularly  in  the  absence  of  any 
positive  scriptural  or  ecclesiastical  testimony  to  the  contrary,  that 
their  office  in  the  Church  likewise  terminated  with  them,  and  was 
not  perpetuated  by  the  Episcopacy.  Melanchthon,  in  the  Appendix 
to  the  Smalcald  Articles  (Bk.  Con.,  p.  403,  Eng.  Ed.),  says:  "The 
gospel  commands  those  who  should  regulate  the  Church,  to  preach 
the  gospel,  to  remit  sins,  and  to  administer  the  sacraments;  and  it 
moreover  gives  them  the  authority  to  excommunicate  those  who 
live  in  the  open  commission  of  sin,  and  to  absolve  those  who  desire 
to  amend  their  lives.  Now  every  one,  even  our  adversaries,  must 
confess  that  all  who  preside  over  the  Church  have  this  command 
alike,  whether  they  be  called  pastors  or  presbyters  or  bishops." 
The  Formula  of  Government  of  the  General  Synod,  (Ch.  Ill, 
Sec.    I,)  states  that  "the  persons  filling  the   clerical   office   in  the 

*  Cf.  Canon  Venables,  quoted  in  Art.  Episcopacy,  in  Ency.  Brit.,  9th  Edit. 
t  Canon  Venables,  Art.  Episcopacy,  Ency.  Brit.,  9th  Edit. 


580  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

New  Testament,  are  designated  in  Scripture  by  different  names,  as 
bishop,  presbyter  or  elder,  etc.  All  these  are  by  divine  right  of 
equal  rank."  Hence  we  conclude  that  if  an  Episcopal  organiza- 
tion existed  in  the  early  Church,  it  is  to  be  regarded  entirely  as  a 
human  ordinance.  Neander,  in  his  Church  History,  thus  explains 
the  origin  of  the  Episcopal  office,  as  distinct  from  that  of  elder,  in 
the  early  Christian  Church :  "  Soon  after  the  apostolic  age,  the  stand- 
ing office  of  president  of  the  presbytery  must  have  been  formed; 
which  president,  as  having  preeminently  the*oversight  over  all,  was 
designated  b)^  the  special  name  of  'ETviaKon-o-,  and  thus  distinguished 
from  the  other  presbyters.  Thus  the  name  came  at  length  to  be 
applied  exclusively  to  this  presbyter,  while  the  name  presbyter  con- 
tinued at  first  to  be  common  to  all ;  for  the  bishops,  as  presiding 
presbyters,  had  no  official  character  other  than  that  of  the  presby- 
ters generally.  They  were  only  primi  inter  pares!'  *  Considered 
merely  as  a  human  ordinance,  the  Episcopal  form  of  government 
has  been  advocated  as  promoting  tranquillity  and  good  order,  and 
as  not  contradictory  at  least  to  the  example  of  the  Apostolic 
Church.  It  is  thus  considered  "  the  means  of  the  confederation  of 
the  church.  The  bishop  represents  the  church,  and  is  the  centre  of 
unity  to  the  body,  a  safeguard  against  disunion  and  a  security  for 
the  harmonious  cooperation  of  its  various  constituents."  f  No 
doubt  there  is  advantage  to  the  local  congregation  and  the  rector  or 
pastor,  in  the  personal  or  individual  oversight  and  visitation  of  a 
bishop;  and  in  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Sweden,  Norway,  Den- 
mark, and  in  Iceland,  where  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  pre- 
vails, the  Episcopal  form  of  government  is  adopted,  not  as  of  divine 
obligation,  but  as  a  human  ordinance  of  value  to  the  Church.  The 
Presbyterian  and  Congregational  forms  of  government  have  been 
already  described  in  the  words  of  their  own  confessions  of  faith. 

The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  this  country,  discarding 
Episcopacy,  exhibits  both  Congregational  and  Presbyterian  princi- 
ples of  government.  It  harmonizes  with  the  doctrines  of  our  Church, 
and  the  genius  of  our  people,  that  the  authority  and  government  of 
the  Church,  in  some  respects,  should  be  vested  entirely  in  the  mem- 
bers of  the  local  congregation,  and  not  delegated  nor  subjected  to  a 

*Vol.  I.,  p.  190,  Eng.  Ed. 

t  Canon  Venables,  Ency.,  Brit.,  9th  Ed.,  Art.  Episcopacy. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH,  58 1 

foreign  jurisdiction.  Neander,  commenting  on  the  constitution  of 
government  in  the  early  Christian  Church,  observes  that  "  the  mon- 
archical form  of  government  was  not  suited  to  the  Christian  com- 
munity of  spirit."*  Thus  our  church  recognizes  the  Congregational 
pohty  to  this  extent,  that  the  local  congregation  is  free  to  manage 
its  own  affairs  in  the  control  of  its  property,  in  the  choice  of  its  pas- 
tor, and  in  the  ordinary  government  and  discipline  of  its  members. 
Yet  the  Presbyterian  principle  of  organization  appears  in  the  synod- 
ical  relation  of  the  local  congregations.  In  this  relation  the  congre- 
gation adopts  the  constitution  of  Synod,  and  whilst  it  thus  partici- 
pates through  its  representative  in  the  legislation  of  the  general  for 
the  local  church,  it  is  likewise  subject  to  the  authority  of  Synod  ;  e.g. 
should  the  local  co-ngregation  sever  its  connection  with  Synod  by 
its  own  act,  it  may  deprive  itself  of  a  pastor  who  will  teach  its  con- 
fession of  faith,  inasmuch  as  "  pastors  are  amenable  to  Synod,  which 
has  the  entire  jurisdiction  over  them."  f  The  advantage  of  an  over- 
sight of  the  churches,  which  is  attributed  to  the  Episcopacy,  is  to 
some  degree  realized  in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  through 
the  Synod  and  Synodical  Conference.  For  these  bodies  visit  the 
local  congregations  from  time  to  time,  not,  however,  as  frequently 
as  bishops  or  presiding  elders;  on  the  other  hand,  the  congregations 
through  the  lay  delegates  and  pastors  come  into  frequent  associa- 
tion with  the  Church  at  large  through  the  Synod  and  Conference, 
when  the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  the  local  congregations  are 
in  some  measure  supervised.  It  might  be  profitable  to  discuss  the 
question  whether  in  our  Synodical  Conference  districts  a  systematic 
visitation  of  local  congregations,  by  a  suitable  person  in  an  official 
capacity,  is  feasible  and  desirable,  and  whether  such  a  practice  would 
be  consistent  with  the  Congregational  and  Presbyterian  principles 
of  government  already  recognized  in  our  church.  Our  General 
Synod  is  the  representative,  and  likewise  the  legislative  body  for 
the  entire  church.  It  possesses,  however,  advisory  rather  than  judi- 
cial power.  It  is  of  great  value  in  forming  a  bond  of  union  in  the 
church,  and  in  giving  to  it  organic  stability.  It  is  also  an  important 
agency  in  the  general  missionary,  benevolent,  and  educational  oper- 
ations of  the  Church.     From  this  cursory  view  of  the  several  exist- 

*Ch.  Hist,  vol.  i.,  p.  183,  Eng.  Ed. 
t  Form.  Gov.,  Ch.  HI,  Sec.  3,  Gen.  Synod. 
38 


582  .  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ing  forms  of  government,  it  will  be  observed  that  the  EvangeHcal 
Lutheran  Church  recognizes  as  principles,  sanctioned  by  the  New 
Testament,  the  parity  of  the  ministry;  the  rights  and  liberty  of  the 
local  congregation ;  the  necessity,  however,  for  representative  gov- 
ernment with  authority  to  reach  and  render  efficient  the  entire  mem- 
bership of  the  Church.  These  principles  correspond  with  those 
which  regulate  our  civil  government,  and  embody  the  truth  that  hu- 
man governments  derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the 
governed;  whilst  their  efficiency  and  success,  both  in  the  Church 
and  State,  seem  to  require,  more  than  any  other,  the  highest  type  of 
intelligence  and  piety  in  the  people, 

IV.  Conservation  of  the  Faith  of  the  Church. 

There  remains  to  be  considered  the  application  of  the  principles 
regulating  human  ordinances  in  the  Church,  with  respect  to  the  con- 
servation of  the  faith. 

a.  Creeds ;  tJieir  necessity  mid  limitation.  Formulas  of  Faith, 
called  Creeds  or  Confessions  of  Faith,  have  been,  and  ever  will  be,  a 
necessity  in  the  constitution  and  development  of  the  Church.  The 
Creed  is  the  testimony  of  the  Church  to  divine  truth :  thus  the 
Church  declares  what  it  believes;  thus  it  reproves  the  errors  and  un- 
belief of  the  world ;  thus  it  protects  itself  from  the  peril  of  false 
doctrines  taught  within  its  fold;  thus  it  instructs  its  members  in^the 
knowledge  of  the  divine  word.  Our  inquiry  now  pertains,  not  to 
the  necessity  of  Creeds  as  a  defence  of  faith  against  those  without 
the  Church  who  assail  the  truth,  such  as  avowed  atheists  and  infi- 
dels ;  but  to  what  extent  human  ordinances  may  defend  the  faith 
against  those  within  the  Church,  of  whom  it  is  alleged  that  they  are 
false  teachers  who  misunderstand  or  pervert  the  truth  of  the  divine 
word.  The  subjective  views  of  the  regenerate  concerning  the 
meaning  of  the  divine  word,  are  not  exempt  from  the  influence  of 
the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  their  members,  and  which  has  impaired 
their  mental  as  well  as  moral  nature.  Notwithstanding  this  incom- 
plete sanctification  of  all  believers,  which  has  occasioned  the  various 
and  discordant  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Christ  declares  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  will  guide  the  Church  into  all  truth,  John  xvi.  13,  and 
that  it  can  "  know  of  the  doctrine  whether  it  be  of  God,"  John  vii. 
17.  He  has  promised  furthermore  to  be  with  his  Church  all  the 
days  of  time,  and  that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 


HUMAN  ORDINANCES  IN  THE  CHURCH.        583 

Hence,  that  which  especially  marks  and  identifies  the  Church 
throughout  her  history,  is  that  she  endeavors  to  "hold  fast  the  form 
of  sound  words,"  2  Tim.  i.  13.  She  can  suffer  no  man  to  take  her 
crown.  Rev.  iii.  11.  This  principle,  which  justifies  the  Church  in 
establishing  symbols  as  the  evidence  and  defence  of  her  faith,  and 
for  the  rejection  of  error,  is  recognized  throughout  Christendom. 
Hence,  the  first  controverted  question  in  the  Church  respecting  sym- 
bols of  faith  is  not  whether  they  are  necessary,  but  what  is  their 
proper  limitation.  The  entire  Christian  Church  admits  the  necessity 
of  contending  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  so  far  as  the 
three  QEcumenical  Creeds  are  concerned,  viz.,  the  Apostles',  the  Ni- 
cene,  and  Athanasian,  because  those  symbols  express  the  subjective 
faith  alike  of  the  Protestant  and  Roman  Churches.  If  we  consider 
the  doctrine  which  especially  distinguishes  the  Protestant  from  the 
Roman  Church,  viz..  Justification  by  faith  alone,  we  find  that  doc- 
trine engrafted  on  the  various  creeds  of  Prote'stantism  as  "the  arti- 
cle of  a  standing  or  a  falling  Church";  over  against  the  doctrine  of 
the  Roman  Church,  that  there  is  a  justifying  merit  in  good  works 
as  well  as  in  faith.  When  we  consider  the  Protestant  Church  ex- 
clusively, we  observe,  however,  a  wide  diversity  of  opinion  respect- 
ing the  doctrines  of  the  divine  word.  United  in  the  faith  which 
exhibits  the  doctrines  essential  to  salvation,  and  testifies  to  the  errors 
of  Romanism,  the  Protestant  Church  is  itself  divided  upon  doctrines 
which  although  not  essential  to  salvation  are  fundamental  with  re- 
spect to  a  right  understanding  of  the  divine  word.  Hence  the 
question  occurs;  shall  the  Church  contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  as 
it  is  expressed  in  the  three  CEcumenical  Creeds,  or  does  fidelity  to 
the  truth  relate  likewise  to  those  doctrines  concerning  which  there 
is  diversity  of  opinion  in  the  Protestant  Church?  Shall  those  doc- 
trines alone,  which  are  essential  to  salvation  be  embodied  in  a  con- 
fession of  faith,  or  those  likewise,  which  are  essential  to  a  right  and 
full  understanding  of  the  word?  It  must  be  admitted  that  there  is 
a  relative  value,  so  far  as  the  salvation  of  the  soul  is  concerned, 
between  doctrines  confessed  in  the  early  creeds  of  the  Universal 
Christian  Church,  and  those  doctrines  which  have  divided  Protest- 
antism into  denominations.  Nevertheless  the  divine  word  indicates 
that  the  doctrines  which  divide  the  Protestant  Church  are  fundamen- 
tal with  respect  to  the  purity  and  completeness  of  the  faith  and  to 
the  welfare  of  the  soul,     "All  scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of 


584  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

God,  and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  etc.,  *  *  that  the  man  of 
God  may  be  perfect,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works,"  2 
Tim,  iii.  16,  17.  The  command  of  Christ  in  "teaching  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you,"  Matt,  xxviii.  20.  "  Whoso- 
ever shall  break  one  of  these  least  commandments,  and  shall  teach 
men  so,  he  shall  be  called  the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven," 
Matt.  v.  19.  All  the  doctrines  of  Scripture  are  so  related  and  essen- 
tial that  "  the  whole  body"  is  "  fitly  joined  together  and  compacted 
by  that  which  every  joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  effectual  work- 
ing in  the  measure  of  every  part,"  Eph.  iv.  16.  Hence  error  with 
respect  to  one  doctrine  affects  to  some  degree  the  clearest  appre- 
hension of  another,  even  as  "the  shattering  of  a  single  nerve  in  one 
extremity  of  the  body  is  felt  throughout  the  system."*  "Truth  is 
an  undivided  whole,  the  component  parts  of  which  are  essentially 
connected,  no  one  article  of  faith  can  be  undervalued  without  affect- 
ing the  integrity  of  the  whole,  (as  far  as  an  individual  is  personally 
concerned)."  f  To  use  another  figure  of  the  Apostle,  whilst  there 
is  but  one  foundation  upon  which  the  Church  can  build,  "  for  other 
foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ," 
I  Cor.  iii.  II,  yet  it  matters  much  whether  upon  that  foundation 
the  Church  rears  the  superstructure  of  gold  and  silver  and  precious 
stones,  or  whether  it  builds  of  wood  and  hay  and  stubble.  Whilst 
those  in  the  Roman  or  in  any  Protestant  Church,  who  truly  believe 
in  Christ  as  their  Saviour,  shall  be  saved;  yet  they  shall  suffer  loss, 
when  they  build  upon  the  foundation  of  Christ,  any  doctrine  or  life 
not  in  harmony  with  the  entire  truth  of  the  divine  word,  for  "the 
fire  shall  try  every  man's  work  of  what  sort  it  is.  If  any  man's 
work  abide  which  he  hath  built  thereupon,  he  shall  receive  a  reward. 
If  any  man's  work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss;  but  he  him- 
self shall  be  saved;  yet  so  as  by  fire,"  i  Cor.  iii.  13-15.  Hence 
those  who  propagate  error,  even  through  ignorance  of  the  truth, 
work  incalculable  mischief  Instead  of  a  stately  palace  they  rear  an 
unsightly  structure  upon  the  foundation  which  is  Jesus  Christ;  in- 
stead of  a  strong  and  beautiful  Church  built  of  the  pure  gold  and 
silver  and  precious  stones  of  divine  truth,  we  see  the  frail  and  un- 
sightly wood,  hay  and   stubble,  as  an   exhibition  of  the  Temple  of 

*  C.  F.  Schaeffer,  D.  D. 

t  G.  V.  Lechler.  D.  D.,  Com.  Acts,  p.  81,  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer's  tr. 


HUMAN  ORDINANCES  IN  THE  CHURCH.        585 

God.  Hence  all  the  doctrines  of  the  divine  word  may  be  viewed  as 
fundamental  in  their  relation  to  the  system  of  divine  truth ;  for 
while  some  are  fundamental  with  respect  to  the  salvation  of  the 
soul,  all  are  fundamental  with  respect  to  a  right  knowledge  and  faith 
of  the  word.  The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  recognizes  the  im- 
portance of  this  principle  more  fully  than  any  other  portion  of 
Protestantism,  as  the  extent  of  her  symbolical  books  apparently  at- 
tests. Her  confessions  declare  her  faith  in  regard  to  every  import- 
ant doctrine  that  is  taught  in  the  divine  word,  and  her  position  is 
clearly  and  fully  defined  in  the  great  controversies  of  the  Church, 
respecting  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints. 

b.  Doctrinal  Basis  of  the  General  Synod.  The  doctrinal  basis  of 
our  General  Synod,  as  a  human  ordinance  in  the  Church,  seems 
practically  to  represent  the  subjective  faith  of  the  entire  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  its  antithesis  to  those  doctrines  which  especially 
mark  and  identify  the  Roman  Church  and  the  Reformed  denomina- 
tions; without,  however,  representing  the  positive  faith  which  par- 
ticularly characterizes  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  and  which 
distinguishes  it  from  the  various  denominations  of  Christendom;  for 
in  withholding  its  assent  to  all  the  symbolical  books,  as  a  correct 
explanation  and  defence  of  the  doctrines  taught  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  it  implies  that  its  phrase  "fundamental  doctrines,"  refers 
only  to  doctrines  which  are  fundamental  to  salvation,  and  not  to 
doctrines  which  are  fundamental  to  a  right  understanding  of  divine 
truth  as  represented  in  all  the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  The  ethical  defence  of  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  Gen- 
eral Synod  is,  that  it  rightly  represents  the  subjective  faith  of  its 
adherents,  who,  on  the  one  hand,  cannot  conscientiously  assent  to  a 
Roman  or  Reformed  confession  of  faith,  but  on  the  other  hand,  are 
unprepared  to  accept  the  doctrines  which  especially  identify  the 
Church  of  the  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession.  As  an  organ  of 
providence  the  General  Synod  has  occupied  a  conspicuous  sphere 
in  the  development  of  our  Church  in  this  land.  Such,  however,  is 
the  importance  of  the  doctrines  exhibited  and  confessed  in  all  the 
symbolical  books  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  in  their  rela- 
tion to  the  entire  system  of  truth  revealed  in  the  divine  word;  such  is 
the  unwillingness  of  the  General  Synod  to  affirm  the  error  of  those 
Symbols  in  its  doctrinal  basis;  and  such  is  the  desirableness  of  posi- 
tive, accurate  and  definite  faith  respecting  them;  that  it  would  seem 


586  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  be  a  just  inference  that  the  true  vocation  of  the  General  Synod, 
not  unmindful  of  her  external  development  and  devotional  life,  is 
the  determination  of  the  truth  or  error  of  those  doctrines  which  it  is 
yet  unprepared  to  confess  and  defend.  Such  a  calling  is  indicated 
by  tendencies  in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  to  withhold 
pulpit  and  altar  fellowship  from  those  who  do  not  confess  the  doc- 
trines of  the  divine  word  as  they  are  taught  in  her  symbolical  books. 
Thus  in  reply  to  the  question,  whether  all  who  live  in  the  Church 
are  to  be  admitted  to  the  Holy  Supper?  Gerhard  (x.  381)  says: 
"Nor  are  all  Christians  promiscuously  to  be  admitted  to  the 
Lord's  Supper;  but  according  to  the  rule  of  Paul,  only  those  who 
examine  themselves,  i  Cor.  xi.  28,  /.  e.  those  who  condemn  them- 
selves, v.  31:  those  who  distinguish  the  body  of  the  Lord  from 
ordinary  food,  v.  29,  and  who  show  forth  the  Lord's  death,  v.  26. 
*****  Therefore  all  those  are  excluded  who  are  either 
unwilling  or  unable  to  examine  themselves,  as  (i)  those  who  are 
defiled  with  heresy,  i.  e.  who  pertinaciously  and  refractorily  perse- 
vere in  error  concerning  the  foundation  of  the  faith,  neglecting  all 
kinds  of  admonition ;  for,  since  by  their  heresy  they  cut  themselves 
off  from  the  fellowship  of  the  true  Church  they  also  cannot  at  all  be 
admitted  to  the  Sacraments,  which  are  the  blessings  peculiar  to  the 
Church;  such  are,  e.g.,  those  who  pertinaciously  deny  the  true  and 
substantial  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Holy 
Supper.     Matt.  vii.  6;  Phil.  iii.  2;    I  Cor.  xi.  29."* 

This  exclusiveness  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  manifestation  of  the  con- 
fidence of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  all  her  symbols  as 
correct  exhibitions  of  divine  truth,  and  of  her  fidelity  to  guard  its 
purity.  Hence  her  "close  communion  "  is  not  so  much  a  challenge 
as  an  appeal,  to  those  "who  are  nigh,"  as  well  as  "to  those  who  are 
afar  off,"  "  to  search"  and  "  try  "  her  symbols  of  faith,  either  to  prove 
that  they  are  built  upon  the  treacherous  sands  of  error,  or  else  to 
learn  that  they  abide  upon  the  enduring  rock  of  truth. 

c.  The  Augsburg  Confession.  This  year,  distinguished  as  the 
sabbatic  year  of  jubilee  in  the  history  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
the  oldest  of  denominational  creeds,  finds  that  symbol  yet  abiding 
in  the  bloom  and  vigor  of  its  youth.  In  its  eventful  experience  of 
seven  semi- centennials,  it  has  passed  through  fire  and  flood,  and  like 
our  Lord,  whose  person  and  work  it  teaches  us  rightly  to  appre- 

*  Quoted  in  Schmid's  Dogmatik,  Drs.  Hay  and  Jacobs'  trans.,  p.  592. 


HUMAN    ORDINANCES    IN    THE    CHURCH.  587 

hend,  it  has  often  been,  as  to  its  integrity,  despised  and  rejected  of 
men,  yet  it  survives  to-day  with  more  adherents  than  are  claimed 
by  all  other  creeds  of  Protestantism  combined.  Containing  in  the 
germ  those  doctrines  which  are  -more  fully  developed  throughout 
the  symbolical  books,  it  seems  to  be  the  first  necessary  basis,  upon 
which  our  Evangelical  Zion  can  hope  to  realize  an  organic  unity  of 
faith.  Indeed,  says  Rev.  Dr.  Krauth,  in  the  introduction  to  his 
translation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  :  "  To  it  the  eyes  of  all 
deep  thinkers  have  been  turned  as  to  the  star  of  hope  amid  the 
internal  strifes  of  nominal  Protestantism."  He  then  quotes  Gieseler, 
the  great  Reformed  Church  historian,  as  saying:  "If  the  question 
be,  which  among  all  Protestant  confessions  is  best  adapted  for  form- 
ing the  foundation  of  a  union  among  Protestant  Churches,  we 
declare  ourselves  unreservedly  for  the  Augsburg  Confession."  As 
the  Magna  Charta  of  the  Reformation,  as  the  symbol  of  faith  for 
forty  millions  of  the  Protestant  Church,  as  a  clear  and  correct  exhi- 
bition of  those  doctrines  of  the  divine  word  of  which  it  treats,  the 
Augsburg  Confession  must  ever  stand  preeminent  among  the  human 
ordinances  instituted  in  the  visible  Church. 

We  began,  in  the  order  of  our  discussion  of  specific  human  ordi- 
nances in  the  Church,  with  the  consideration  of  the  institution  of  the 
Lord's  day;  we  end  with  that  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  If  there 
is  a  relative  value  and  importance  among  human  ordinances  in  the 
Church,  we  may  say  of  these  two,  that  they  are  the  alpha  and 
omega,  the  beginning  and  the  end  ;  they  are  the  bright  and  morn- 
ing stars.  Yet  we  may  not  undervalue  any  human  ordinance  in  the 
Church,  established  in  conformity  with  the  principles  enjoined  in 
the  fifteenth  article  of  the  Augustana,  "  for  as  the  body  is  not  one 
member  but  many,"  i  Cor.  xii.  14,  "and  the  head  cannot  say  to  the 
feet  I  have  no  need  of  you,"  so  it  must  be  said  of  every  human  or- 
dinance rightly  instituted  in  the  Church,  as  has  been  already  said 
of  the  value  of  every  doctrine  taught  in  the  divine  word,  that  "  the 
whole  body  is  fitly  joined  together  and  compacted  by  that  which 
every  joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  effectual  working  in  the 
measure  of  every  part."     Eph.  iv.  16. 


ARTICLE  XVI. 


CIVIL  POLITY  AND  GOV- 
ERNMENT. 

BY  L.  E.  ALBERT,  D.  D. 


THE  Sixteenth  Article    of  the  Augsburg    Confession    treats    of 
Civil  Affairs,  and  reads  as  follows  : 

XVI.     De  Rebus  Civilibus. 

De  rebus  civilibus  decent,  quod  legitimae  ordinatones  civiles  sint  bona  opera 
Dei,  quod  Christianis  liceat  genere  Magistratus,  exercere,  judicia,  judicare  res 
ex  Imperatoriis  et  aliis  praesentibus  legibus,  supplicia  jure  constituere  jure  bel- 
lare,  militare,  lege  contrahere,  tenere  proprium,  jusjurandum  postulantibus 
Magistratibus  dare,  ducere  uxorem,  nubere. 

Damnant  Anabaptistas,  qui  intardicunt  haec  civilia  officia  Christianis.  Dam- 
nant  et  illos,  qui  evangelicam  perfectionem  non  coUocant  in  timore  Dei  et  fide, 
sed  in  deserendis  civilibus  officiis  quia  evangelium  tradit  justitiam  aeternam 
cordia.  Interim  non  dissipat  politiam  aut  oeconiam,  sed  maxime  postulat  con- 
servare  tranquam  ordinatones  Dei,  et  in  talibus  ordinationibus  exercere  carita- 
tem.  Itaque  necessario  debent  Christiani  obedire  Magistratibus  suis  et  legibus; 
nisi  cum  jubent  peccare,  tunc  enim  magis  debent  obedire  Deo  quam  homini- 
bus.* 

XVI.     Of  Civil  Affairs. 

Concerning  civil  affairs  our  churches  teach  that  legitimate  civil  enactments 
are  good  works  of  God  :  that  it  is  lawful  for  Christians  to  hold  civil  offices,  to 
pronounce  judgment,  and  decide  cases  according  to  the  imperial  and  other  ex- 
isting laws:  to  inflict  just  punishment,  wage  just  wars,  and  serve  in  them:  to 
make  lawful  contracts ;  hold  property  ;  to  make  oath  when  required  by  the 
magistrates  ;  to  marry  and  be  married. 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists,  who  forbid  to  Christians  the  performance  of 
these  civil  duties.  They  also  condemn  those  who  make  evangelical  perfection 
consist  not  in  the  fear  of  God  and  in  faith,  but  in  the  abandonment  of  all  civil 


Hase  Libri  Symbolici. 

588 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  589 

duties;  because  the  Gospel  teaches  the  necessitj'  of  ceaseless  righteousness  of 
heart,  while  it  does  not  abolish  the  duties  of  civil  and  domestic  life,  but  spe- 
cially requires  them  to  be  observed  as  ordinances  of  God,  and  performed  in 
the  spirit  of  Christian  love.  Hence  Christians  ought  necessarily  to  yield  obe- 
dience to  their  civil  officers  and  laws;  unless  when  they  command  something 
sinful ;  for  then  they  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  man.* 

Historical  Introduction. 

Many  things  were  attributed  to  the  Reformation  by  its  enemies 
which  had  no  legitimate  connection  with  it.  Among  these  were  the 
disturbances  caused  in  the  German  Empire  by  the  Anabaptists.  The 
earHest  historical  notice  of  this  sect  is  connected  with  these  disturb- 
ances, originating  with  "  the  prophets  of  Zwickau,"  which  began  in 
the  year  1521,  and  culminated  in  a  fierce  civil  war.  The  leader  of 
these  prophets  was  Thomas  Miinzer,  the  Lutheran  pastor  of  Zwickau, 
who  by  the  perusal  of  the  works  of  the  mystic  Tauler  had  become 
a  wild  fanatic.  Being  deposed  from  his  post  at  Zwickau,  he  retired 
intoThuringia,  where  he  propagated  his  tenets.    Those  tenets  were: 

"(i)  That  the  true  word  of  God  is  not  Holy  Scripture,  but  an 
internal  inspiration.     (2)  That  the  baptism  of   infants   is   unlawful. 

(3)  That  there  must  be   a   visible  kingdom   of  Christ   upon   earth. 

(4)  And  that  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ  all  must  be  equal  and  must 
enjoy  a  community  of  goods."  f  At  this  crisis,  the  long-impending 
rebellion  of  the  peasantry  against  the  nobility  broke  out  in  southern 
Germany,  and  in  a  short  time  spread  through  Suabia,  Franconia 
and  Alsace.  At  the  first  breaking  out  of  this  war,  it  seemed  to 
have  been  kindled  only  by  civil  and  political  views,  and  aimed  only 
at  the  diminution  of  the  tasks  imposed  upon  the  peasants,  and  to 
their  obtaining  a  greater  measure  of  liberty  than  they  had  hitherto 
enjoyed.  But  no  sooner  had  the  enthusiast  Miinzer  put  himself  at 
the  head  of  this  outrageous  rabble,  than  the  face  of  things  changed 
entirely,  and  the  civil  commotions  were  turned  into  a  religious  war. 
Although  there  was  a  difference  of  sentiment  among  the  seditious 
multitude,  and  they  were  greatly  divided  in  their  demands,  yet 
their  leading  views,  according  to  Dr.  Dorner,  were  as  follows : 
"The  Anabaptists  are  indeed  amongst  themselves  very  different. 
Some  are  rather  of  a  passive  nature,  and  approach  in  their  appear- 

*  General  Synod's  Translation. 

t  Blunt's  History  of  Sects  and  Heresies. 


590  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ance  to  certain  monastic  orders,  such  as  the  God  resigned  praying 
Baptists,  who  did  almost  nothing  but  pray,  and  made  praying  their 
work;  the  secluded  spiritual  Baptists,  who  could  not  see  laughter 
nor  mirth  without  sighing,  and  who,  after  the  fashion  of  the  mon- 
astic orders,  laid  down  definite  rules  with  regard  to  clothes,  walk- 
ing and    standing;    so   too   the    ecstatic    and    the    silent   brethren. 
Others  are  urged    rather   by  practical    impulses,   whether  it  be  to 
introduce  by  force  the  holy  kingdom,  or  to  employ  themselves  in 
teaching,  as  the  apostolic  brethren,  who  preached  repentance,  evan- 
gelized, forsook  wife  and  children,  and,  after  the  fashion  of  the  beg- 
ging  orders,  let  themselves  be  nourished  by  others.     Others  again, 
the  so-called  free  brethren,  are  Antinomians:  after  having  received 
true    baptism,   it    is   impossible    to   sin    any   more ;    community  of 
goods  and  wives  belong  to  the  holy  kingdom ;  nothing  external  is 
of  any  importance.     God  looks   upon   the   heart,   hence   one   may 
even  deny  the  truth  under  persecution.     Still  all  these  tendencies 
have  also  a  common  family  likeness.     Besides  the  above  described 
elevation,  after  an  enthusiastic  fashion,  of  the  spirit  of  the  internal 
Word  of  God  above  the  Holy  Scriptures,  they  have  a  church  ideal, 
which  is  essentially  impregnated  by  Romish  ideas.     Their  doctrine 
of  faith  in  relation  to  works,  is  also  anything  but  the  reformation 
doctrine:    it   rather    occupies    essentially    the    Romish    standpoint. 
Man  becomes  pious  before  God  not  by  faith  without  works,  but  by 
the  infusion  of  love  and  holiness  (which  most  certainly  evidences  it- 
self according  to  their  views  in  a  sort  of  communism).     *     *     And 
finally  it  stands  related  to  the  Romish  Church,  in  that  both  occupy 
a  kindred  position  towards  the  State.     Whilst  both  aim  in  the  most 
decided  manner  at  the  State  form  of  community,  for  what  they  call 
the  Church,  they  both   regard  the  State  in  itself  as  profane    in  its 
nature   and   as   having  no   proper  independent  moral   significance. 
The  Anabaptists  forbid  Christians  to  take  offices  of  civil  authority, 
oaths,  or  military  service,  although  they  do  not  disdain  the  means 
of  external  compulsion,  which  only  become  the  State,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  carrying  out  their  theory.      *     *     They  would  that  only 
the  exclusively  divine  will  should  prevail,  in  whatever  form  it  may 
make  itself  known.     They  are  thus  the  enemy  of  all  natural  human 
ordinances  and  would  have  them  supplanted  by  theocratical."*     In 
carrying  out  these  principles  they  rushed  without  reflection  or  fore- 

*  History  of  Prot,  Theology. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  59 1 

sight  into  every  act  of  violence  and  cruelty,  and  committed  disorders 
which  rendered  them  justly  odious  in  the  sight  of  all  law-abiding 
people.  To  put  down  this  rebellion,  it  was  necessary  for  the  princes 
of  the  empire  to  resort  to  arms.  Accordingly,  in  1525,  the  turbu- 
lent malcontents  were  defeated  in  a  pitched  battle  at  Miilhausen,  and 
Miinzer  the  ring-leader  was  put  to  death.  Of  course  the  enemies  of 
the  Reformation  unceasingly  repeated  that  Luther  and  his  doctrines 
had  caused  the  insurrection.  They  asked  the  Reformer  with  a 
malignant  sneer,  if  he  had  not  at  length  discovered  that  it  was  easier 
to  kindle  a  conflagration  than  to  put  it  out.  It  was  unfair  however 
to  charge  these  troubles  upon  the  Reformation,  though  they  may 
have  been  indirectly  influenced  by  it.  The  event  certainly  favored 
liberal  ideas,  but  the  causes  which  led  to  these  disturbances  existed 
long  before  the  Reformation.  The  Reformation  only  gave  new 
force  to  the  discontentment  already  fermenting.  Luther  did  all  in 
his  power  at  first  to  prevent  and  then  to  put  down  these  agitations. 
"  Revolt,"  he  had  said,  "does  not  produce  the  desired  amelioration 
and  it  is  condemned  by  God.  What  is  revolt,  if  it  be  not  a  man's 
revenging  himself?  The  devil  tries  to  stir  up  to  revolt  those  who 
embrace  the  Gospel,  with  the  view  of  bringing  reproach  upon  it: 
but  they  who  have  rightly  understood  my  doctrine,  do  not  revolt." 
"A  Christian,"  he  would  say,  "ought  to  endure  death  an  hundred 
times  rather  than  take  the  slightest  imaginable  part  in  the  revolt  of 
the  peasants."  To  the  elector  he  wrote  :  "  What  gives  me  particular 
delight  is,  that  these  enthusiasts  themselves  are  boasting  to  all  who 
choose  to  listen  to  them,  that  they  do  not  belong  to  us.  It  is  the 
Spirit  that  impels  them,  they  say;  and  as  for  me,  I  answer:  It  is  an 
evil  spirit  that  bears  no  better  fruits  than  the  {tillage  of  monasteries 
and  of  churches:  the  greatest  robbers  on  earth  are  capable  of  doing 
as  much."  In  fact,  Luther  had  never  ceased  to  combat  the  rebel- 
lion. "  Not  satisfied  with  using  his  pen,  even  while  the  insurrection 
was  as  yet  in  all  its  force,  he  left  Wittenberg  and  traversed  some  of 
the  most  disturbed  districts.  He  preached,  he  strove  to  calm  men's 
minds,  and  his  hand  with  a  might  that  it  derived  from  God,  diverted, 
appeased,  and  restored  to  their  proper  bed  the  furious  overflowing 
waters."  * 

From  all  this  it  can  be  seen,  that  when  the  Reformers  came  to 
the  preparation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  they  would  embrace 

*D'Aubigne  Hist,  of  Reformation. 


592  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  opportunity  tlien  presented  to  set  themselves  right  before  the 
world  on  Civil  Affairs,  and  show  in  what  Government  consisted, 
what  were  its  functions,  and  what  were  the  rights  and  duties  of  those 
who  were  its  subjects.  This  was  done  in  the  Article  under  consid- 
eration. To  ascertain  the  correctness  of  this  delivery,  let  us  look 
at  some  of  the  theories  which  men  have  held  in  reference  to  Civil 
Government. 

Theories  of  Government. 
The  theories  which  men  have  held  in  regard  to  Civil  Government 
may  all  be  reduced  to  two :  the  theory  of  the  social  compact,  and  the 
theory  of  divine  institution.  The  former  theory  is  thus  condensed 
by  Dr.  Dwight :  "This  doctrine  supposes  that  mankind  were  ori- 
ginally without  any  government;  and  that  in  an  absolute  state  of 
nature  they  voluntarily  came  together  for  the  purpose  of  constituting 
a  body  politic,  creating  rulers,  prescribing  their  functions,  and  mak- 
ing laws  directing  their  own  civil  duties.  It  supposes  that  they 
entered  into  grave  and  philosophic  deliberations ;  individually  con- 
sented to  be  bound  by  the  will  of  the  majority  ;  and  cheerfully  gave 
up  tlie  wild  life  of  savage  liberty,  for  restraints,  which  however  neces- 
sary and  useful  no  savage  could  ever  brook,  even  for  a  day.  Ante- 
cedently to  such  an  assembly  and  its  decisions,  the  doctrine  supposes 
that  men  have  no  civil  rights,  obligations,  or  duties,  and,  of  course, 
that  those  who  do  not  consent  to  be  bound  by  such  a  compact,  are 
now  not  the  subjects  of  either  :  such  a  compact,  in  the  apprehension 
of  the  abettors  of  this  doctrine,  being  that  which  creates  all  the  civil 
rights,  obligations,  and  duties  of  man."  *  It  is  a  favorite  theory  of 
the  advocates  of  this  doctrine,  that  "  society  exists  by  virtue  of  each 
individual  conceding  some  portion  of  his  rights  in  order  to  preserve 
the  rest,  and  that  society  has  no  rights  beyond  the  limits  of  such 
concession."  The  doctrine  is  thus  stated  by  its  great  expouader, 
the  Marquis  Beccaria :  "  It  was  necessity  that  forced  men  to  give 
up  a  part  of  their  liberty:  it  is  certain  then  that  every  individual 
would  choose  to  put  into  the  public  stock  the  smallest  portions  pos- 
sible ;  as  much  only  as  was  sufficient  to  engage  others  to  defend  it. 
The  aggregate  of  these,  the  smallest  portions  possible,  forms  the 
right  of  punishment:  all  that  extends  beyond  this  is  abuse,  not  jus- 
tice."    Applying  this  theory  to  the  right  of  society  over  life,  he  says: 

*Dwight's  Theology,  Vol.  III.,  page  324. 


CIVIL    POLITY   AND    GOVERNMENT.  593 

"  Did  any  one  ever  give  to  others  the  right  of  taking  away  his  life? 
Is  it  possible  that  in  the  smallest  portions  of  the  liberty  of  each, 
sacrificed  to  the  good  of  the  public,  can  be  contained  the  greatest  of 
all  good,  life  ?  If  it  were  so,  how  shall  it  be  reconciled  to  the  maxim 
which  tells  us  that  a  man  has  no  right  to  kill  himself,  which  he  cer- 
tainly must  have  if  he  could  give  it  away  to  another."  * 

This  same  idea  is  maintained  by  man\'  who  are  seeking  to  abolish 
capital  punishment.  Its  advocates  insist  that  "no  man  ever  bar- 
tered away  his  original  right  in  his  own  existence;"  that  the  right 
to  life  is  "  a  reserved  right  which  was  never  surrendered  to  society." 
In  a  report  to  the  Massachusetts  Legislature,  Mr.  Rantoul  says: 
"  When  we  surrendered  to  society  the  smallest  possible  portion  of 
our  liberty,  to  enable  us  the  better  to  retain  the  aggregate  of  rights 
which  we  did  not  surrender,  did  we  concede  our  title  to  that  life 
with  which  our  Creator  has  endowed  us  ?  Is  it  to  be  conceived 
that  we  have  consented  to  hold  the  tenure  of  our  earthly  existence 
at  the  discretion  or  the  caprice  of  a  majority,  whose  erratic  legisla- 
tion no  man  can  calculate  beforehand?  While  our  object  was  to 
preserve  as  little  impaired  as  might  be  possible  all  our  rights,  which 
are  all  of  them  comprehended  in  the  right  to  enjoy  life,  can  we  have 
agreed  to  forfeit  that  right  to  live  while  God  shall  spare  our  lives, 
which  is  the  essential  precedent  condition  of  all  our  other  rights  ? 
Have  we  entered  into  any  such  compact?  The  burden  oi proof  is 
wholly  upon  those  who  affirm  that  we  have  so  agreed.  Let  it  be 
shown  that  mankind  in  general,  or  the  inhabitants  of  this  common- 
wealth in  particular,  have  agreed  to  hold  their  lives  as  a  conditional 
grant  from  the  State.  Let  it  be  shown  that  any  one  individual  un- 
derstanding the  bargain,  and  being  free  to  dissent  from  it,  ever  vol- 
untarily placed  himself  in  such  a  miserable  vassalage.  Let  there  at 
least  be  shown  some  reason  for  supposing  that  any  sane  man  has,  of 
his  own  accord,  bartered  away  his  original  right  in  his  own  exist- 
ence, that  his  government  may  tyrannize  more  heavily  over  him  and 
his  fellows,  when  all  the  purposes  of  good  government  may  be  am- 
ply secured  at  so  much  cheaper  a  purchase.  In  no  instance  can  this 
preposterous  sacrifice  be  implied.  It  must  be  shown  by  positive 
proof  that  it  has  been  made,  and  until  this  is  undeniably  established, 
the  right  of  life  remains  among  those  j-esen\d  rights  ichieh  ice  Jiave 
not  yielded  up  to  society!'     This  theory  proves   too  much.     Carried 

*  Essay  on  Crimes  and  Punishnnents. 


594  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

to  its  legitimate  conclusions,  it  runs  into  absurdity.  If  this  theory 
were  correct,  society  would  have  no  right  to  imprison  or  fine  any  of 
its  members.  Government  would  be  a  mere  rope  of  sand.  Convic- 
tions for  crime  would  be  an  utter  impossibility.  Every  criminal 
could  plead  that  he  never  entered  into  a  compact  which  involved 
the  surrender  of  personal  liberty,  or  agreed  to  suffer  any  penalty 
which  the  law  might  inflict  upon  him.  Such  a  theory,  reduced  to 
practice,  would  disarrange  society  and  resolve  it  into  chaos.  The 
entire  fallacy  of  this  theory  lies  in  the  fact  that  man  is  regarded  as 
being  naturally  an  isolated  and  independent  being,  as  having  no 
necessary  connection  with  his  fellows,  and  as  being  led  to  associate 
together  by  express  or  tacit  consent,  only  for  mutual  protection  and 
advantage.  But  such  was  not  the  natural  condition  of  man.  Man, 
from  the  very  beginning,  has  existed  in  society.  He  was  born  in  it, 
his  very  existence  is  a  proof  of  it.  Says  Blackstone:  "We  cannot 
believe,  with  some  theoretical  writers,  that  there  ever  was  a  time 
when  there  was  no  such  thing  as  society.  *  *  This  notion  of  an 
actually  existing  unconnected  state  of  nature  is  too  wild  to  be  seri- 
ously admitted :  and  besides  it  is  plainly  contradictory  to  the  re- 
vealed accounts  of  the  primitive  origin  of  mankind,  and  their  preser- 
vation two  thousand  years  afterwards  :  both  of  which  were  effected 
by  the  means  of  single  families.  These  formed  the  first  society 
among  themselves ;  which  every  day  extended  its  limits,  and  when 
it  grew  too  large  to  subsist  with  convenience  in  that  pastoral  state 
wherein  the  patriarchs  appear  to  have  lived,  it  necessarily  subdivided 
itself  by  various  migrations  into  more.  Afterwards,  as  agriculture 
increased,  which  employs  and  can  maintain  a  much  greater  number 
of  hands,  migrations  became  less  frequent;  and  various  tribes  which 
had  formerly  separated,  re-united,  sometimes  by  compulsion  and 
conquest,  sometimes  by  accident,  and  sometimes  perhaps  by  com- 
pact." '''  Where  man  therefore  exists  there  is  society,  and  where 
society  exists  there  also  in  some  sense  does  the  state  exist.  "  For 
when  society  is  once  formed,  government  results  of  course  as  neces- 
sary to  preserve  and  keep  that  society  in  order."  Lieber,  in  his  Po- 
litical Ethics,  says:  "Human  society  exists  of  necessity,  and  the 
state  being  part  of  the  human  society  *  *  it  exists  likewise  of 
necessity.  *  *  The  state  is  aboriginal  with  man :  it  is  no  volun- 
tary association,  no  contrivance  of  art,  nor  invention  of  suffering,  no 
*  Commentaries,  Vol.1.     Introduction. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT,  595 

company  of  shareholders,  no  machine,  no  work  of  contract  by  indi- 
viduals who  lived  previously  out  of  it,  no  necessary  evil,  no  ill  of 
humanity  which  will  be  cured  in  time  and  by  civilization,  no  acci- 
dental thing,  no  institution  above  and  separate  from  society,  no  in- 
strument for  one  or  a  few — the  State  is  a  form  and  faculty  of  man- 
kind to  lead  the  species  towards  perfection — it  is  the  glory  of  man." 
This  theory  of  a  social  compact  is  therefore  a  false  theory.  Men 
never  stood  isolated  and  independent  as  this  theory  represents  them; 
they  were  born  into  the  household,  and  the  household  grew  into  the 
nation.  Association  was  not  an  act  of  their  own  free  will;  it  grew 
out  of  their  existence,  and  can  never  be  set  aside  but  by  an  act  of 
rebellion. 

Standard  writers  on  Political  Ethics  have  pointed  out  the  fatal 
consequences  attendant  upon  such  a  theory  of  government.  They 
have  shown  most  conclusively  that  if  the  social  compact  is  the  true 
foundation  of  government,  then  the  subject  ought  "to  abide  by  the 
form  of  government  which  he  finds  established,  be  it  ever  so  absurd, 
inconvenient  or  oppressive.  If  it  is  a  despotism,  he  must  submit  to 
it ;  for  by  the  compact  he  has  promised  obedience  to  it,  and  no  man 
can  ever  withdraw  himself  from  the  obligation  of  his  own  promise. 
They  have  shown  also  that  every  violation  of  the  compact  on  the- 
part  of  the  ruler  releases  the  subject  from  his  engagements,  and  of 
course  from  all  obligation  to  obey  the  laws.  "As  in  private  con- 
tracts, the  violation  and  non-performance  of  the  conditions  by  one 
of  the  parties  vacates  the  obligation  of  the  other,  so  in  the  social 
compact  every  transgression  amounts  to  a  forfeiture  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  consequently  authorizes  the  people  to  withdraw  their 
obedience  and  provide  for  themselves  a  new  settlement."*  Such  a 
course  would  endanger  the  stability  of  any  government,  and  lead  to 
nothing  but  confusion  and  sedition.  They  have  likewise  pointed 
out  how,  on  the  same  principle,  "  if  a  subject  violate  any  of  his 
engagements,  however  small,  the  ruler  may  lawfully  make  him 
an  outlaw,  and  deprive  him  of  every  privilege  which  he  holds  as  a 
citizen."  Surely  such  a  theory  disproves  itself,  and  contains  the 
elements  of  its  own  overthrow. 

Over  and  against  this  theory  we  place  the  other  and  correct 
theory,  that  Civil  Government  is  a  divine  ifistiiution.  It  is  not  a 
human  contrivance  instituted  without  necessity  by  human  caprice. 

*Paley"s  Moral  and   Political    Philosophy. 


596  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

It  is  not  the  usurpation  of  a  few  over  the  many,  which  may  be  dis- 
pensed with  whenever  the  many  are  disposed  to  throw  it  off.  It 
belongs  to  the  settled  order  of  things  which  God  has  clearly  willed 
to  exist  for  the  well-being  of  man.  It  springs  out  of  the  necessities 
of  things,  and  embraces  in  its  range  the  entire  race.  It  is  indispens- 
able to  human  happiness;  to  the  safety  of  life,  liberty  and  property; 
to  peace  and  good  order;  to  morals  and  religion;  to  the  very  exist- 
ence of  society  itself  Without  it  the  relations  which  exist  between 
man  and  man  cannot  be  perpetuated  and  perfected.  Civil  govern- 
ment is  needful  to  guarantee  to  men  their  mutual  rights.  It  is 
needful  to  check  the  unbridled  indulgence  of  man's  passions,  to 
throw  a  safeguard  around  both  person  and  property,  to  control  the 
lawless  and  disobedient  and  inspire  a  sense  of  security  against  crime 
and  anarchy.  That  Civil  Government  is  indispensable  to  the  highest 
good  of  man  is  evident  from  his  actions.  No  matter  what  his  color 
or  race  or  condition,  he  cannot  exist  without  some  form  of  civil 
government.  He  must  live  under  law,  and  in  various  ways  he  gives 
shape  and  utterance  to  this  feeling.  His  conviction  is  deep  and 
earnest,  though  often  rudely  expressed,  that  government  is  a  neces- 
sary and  unavoidable  accompaniment  of  his  existence,  and  that  the 
end  of  government  is  the  good  of  mankind.  And  this  is  the  con- 
viction of  the  Jew  and  the  Mohammedan,  the  Papist  and  the  Pro- 
testant, the  Atheist  and  the  Pagan.  In  view  of  these  facts,  there  is 
force  in  the  declaration  of  Hume  when  he  says,  "As  it  is  impossible 
for  the  human  race  to  subsist,  at  least  in  any  comfortable  or  secure 
state,  without  the  protection  of  government,  this  institution  must 
certainly  have  been  intended  by  that  beneficent  Being  who  means 
the  good  of  all  his  creatures,  and  as  it  has  universally,  in  fact,  taken 
place  in  all  countries  and  in  all  ages,  we  may  conclude  with  still 
greater  certainty  that  it  was  intended  by  that  Omniscient  Being  who 
can  never  be  deceived  by  any  event  or  operation."  * 

The  form  of  government  has  not  been  prescribed  by  the  Most 
High.  There  has  been  the  patriarchal  form  of  government  and  the 
monarchical.  There  have  been  aristocracies  and  democracies,  oli- 
garchies and  republics.  There  have  been  governments,  absolute 
and  limited,  pure  and  mixed.  The  form  of  government,  as  well  as 
the  persons  who  administer  it,  must  naturally  depend  on  the  cir- 
cumstances and  will  of  the  people.  And  yet  whatever  the  form 
*  Hume's  Essays,  Vol.  III.,  p.  510. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  597 

may  be,  it  is  an  ordinance  of  God.  Men  may  adopt  a  particular 
form  of  government,  but  government  lies  back  of  their  action  and 
has  for  its  foundation  the  will  of  God.  The  essence  of  government 
is  not  in  human  enactments,  but  in  the  constitution  ordained  by 
God.  Justly  therefore  has  it  been  said,  that  he  who  tramples  on  it 
strikes  a  death-blow  at  an  ordinance  of  God.  In  this  view  govern- 
ment has  a  peculiar  sanctity.  It  rises  before  us  as  a  system  that 
should  be  inviolate.  We  feel  that  it  is  the  supporter  of  our  best 
interests,  that  it  is  linked  to  our  very  destiny. 

Let  us  see  now  how  this  view  agrees  with  the  Scriptures.  Let  us 
look  first  at  the  remarkable  passage  in  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 
In  the  translation  of  Dean  Alford  it  reads  as  follows :  "  Let  every 
soul  submit  himself  to  the  authorities  that  are  above  him;  for  there 
is  no  authority  except  from  God.  So  that  he  which  setteth  himself 
against  the  authority  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God ;  and  they  that 
resist  shall  receive  to  themselves  condemnation.  For  rulers  are  not 
a  terror  to  the  good  work,  but  to  the  evil.  Dost  thou  desire  not  to 
be  afraid  of  the  authority?  Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt 
have  praise  for  the  same;  for  he  is  God's  minister  unto  thee  for  good. 
But  if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid  ;  for  he  weareth  not  the 
sword  in  vain;  for  he  is  God's  minister,  an  avenger  for  wrath  unto 
him  that  doeth  evil.  Wherefore  ye  must  needs  submit  yourselves, 
not  only  because  of  the  wrath  but  also  for  your  conscience  sake. 
For  this  cause  ye  also  pay  tribute;  for  they  are  ministers  of  God 
attending  continually  to  this  very  thing.  Render  to  all  their  dues; 
tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due;  custom  to  whom  custom;  fear  to 
whom  fear;  honor  to  whom  honor."  In  writing  to  Titus  the  same 
apostle  says:  "  Put  them  in  mind  to  submit  themselves  to  govern- 
ment, to  authorities,  to  obey  magistrates,"  and  writing  to  Timothy, 
he  exhorts  that  "  supplications,  prayers,  intercessions,  giving  of 
thanks,  be  made  for  all  men,  for  kings  and  for  all  that  are  in  author- 
ity, that  we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peaceable  life  in  all  godliness  and 
gravity."  To  the  same  purpose  is  the  language  of  Peter:  "  Honor 
all  men;  Love  the  brotherhood  ;  Fear  God;  Honor  the  king."  He 
also  declares  that  the  Lord  "  knoweth  how  to  preserve  the  unright- 
eous unto  the  day  of  judgment  under  punishment,  but  chiefly  them 
that  go  after  the  flesh,  in  the  lust  of  unclcanness,  and  despise  gov- 
ernments. Presumptuous,  self-willed,  they  are  not  afraid  to  rail  at 
dignities." 

39 


598  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

These  sentences,  taken  from  different  parts  of  the  New  Testament, 
all  teach,  with  more  or  less  clearness,  that  Civil  Government  is  an 
institution  of  divine  appointment,  demanding  a  faithful  and  cheerful 
obedience.  It  is  true  that  the  different  modifications  of  government 
are  man's  creation  ;  but  having  become  so  under  that  wise  ordina- 
tion of  which  God  was  the  author,  they  have  in  themselves  a  vitality 
and  a  binding  force  that  commends  them  to  our  regard.  And  it  is 
on  this  ground  that  the  Scriptures  give  to  government  a  lofty  char- 
acter. "They  call  upon  man  to  hold  in  high  regard  its  external 
form,  even  if  it  is  the  work  of  man's  creation.  They  exhort  men  to 
submit  to  kings  and  governors,  because  they  are  those  whom  God 
has  ordained  to  be  ministers  of  good.  Man  is  not  to  make  void 
what  God  foresaw  would  be  for  his  highest  good."  It  may  be  well 
in  this  connection  to  add,  that  while  Christianity  has  nothing  to  do 
with  ^ii  forms  of  human  government,  it  does  not  forbid  us  to  enter- 
tain preferences  in  regard  to  them.  Says  Dr.  Wayland:  "I  do  not 
say  that  Christianity  does  not  create  a  tendency  to  free  institutions. 
I  firmly  believe  that  it  does.  Teaching  universal  equality  of  right, 
it  could  not  do  otherwise.  All  the  true  freedom  on  earth  springs 
essentially  from  the  Gospel.  It  is  intended,  however,  to  improve 
the  condition  of  society,  not  by  revolution  and  bloodshed,  but  by  in- 
stilling into  our  bosoms  a  spirit  of  piety  towards  God  and  of  justice 
and  mercy  towards  men.  While  Christianity  is  doing  this,  it  is  ren- 
dering good  government  necessary,  and  bad  government  impractica- 
ble. In  the  meantime  it  treats  every  existing  government,  in  obe- 
dience to  the  precept  given  by  our  Lord,  '  Render  therefore  unto 
Csesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that  are 
God's.  The  civil  authority  is  established:  the  image  is  stamped,  and 
the  superscription  is  engraved.  The  evidence  of  the  actual  existence 
of  this  authority  is  in  the  hands  of  every  man.  Its  precept  then  is. 
Render  to  society,  as  represented  by  the  magistracy  of  its  choice, 
whatever  society  can  rightfully  claim.  Such  I  understand  to  be  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  Christ."* 

And  with  these  views  the  Confessors  are  in  full  accord,  for  with- 
out committing  themselves  to  any  particular  form  of  government, 
they  simply  declare  that  "  legitimate  civil  enactments  are  good  ivorks 
of  God!'  Government,  then,  being  of  divine  origin,  they  proceed  to 
point  out 

*  University  Sermons,  page  256. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  599 

The  Rights  and  Duties  of  Subjects. 
We  will   understand  more   clearly  their  declaration  if  we  glance 
briefly  at  the  teachings  of  the  Church  up  to  that  period  on  the  sub- 
ject of  Christian  morals.     A  scientific  system  of  morals  is  nowhere 
taught    in    the   New  Testament.     Neither  Jesus    nor    his  disciples 
taught  it  in  that  form.     During  the  first  three  centuries  Christendom 
was  engaged   in  a  conflict  with  the  prevailing  religions  of  the  Jews 
and   heathen,  and   with   the    philosophy   of  antiquity,  so   that   the 
teachers  of  the  early  Christian  Church  were  prevented  from  thinking 
of  a  scientific  development  of  morality.     Their  time  was  fully  occu- 
pied  in  meeting  the  accusations  of  their  enemies;  in  answering  the 
objections  which  were  brought  against  Christianity;  and  wnth  exhib- 
iting the  excellencies  of  their  religion,  in  contrast  with  the  Jewish 
and   heathen  superstitions.     But  after  this  period,  began   to  appear 
those    corruptions    in    the    morals   of  the  Catholic   Church   which 
gradually  increased,  until  virtue   itself  was  endangered.     The  ten- 
dency then  was  towards  a  gloomy  austerity,  and   the  greatest  im- 
portance  was   attached   to  retirement   from   active   life  to  solitude, 
fasting,  celibacy  and  contemplative  exercises.      Realizing  how  little 
such   principles   were   adapted  to   the  common  relations  of  life,  and 
that  naught  but  confusion  must  arise  from  their  general  adoption,  a 
distinction  began  to  be  made  in  morality.     "  Coiiuiion  morality  was 
distinguished   from  the  higher,  and  all   solitary  discipline  and  self- 
denial  were  ascribed  to  the  latter,  to  which  men  could  devote  them- 
selves  only  by  freeing   themselves    from  all    ordinary   obligations. 
*     *     In  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  the  corruptions  of  Christian 
morals   not  only  continued,  but  grew  worse   and    were   multiplied. 
Every  form  of  superstition  gained  the  ascendancy  among  Christians : 
ceremonies  were  multiplied   in  public  worship  and  an  extravagant 
importance  was  attached  to  them,  pilgrimages,  fasts,  a  ii/c  of  celibacy 
and  voluntary  povert}',  and  freedom  from  all  civil  relaiiofis  were  de- 
clared  conducive  to  the  highest  degree  of  holiness.     *     *     Then 
mysticism  helped  on  this  state  of  things.     According  to  the  mystic 
theology,  the  souls  of  men  were  deemed  to  be  actual  parts  and  efflu- 
ences of  the  Godhead:  their  connection  with  bodies  and  inclination 
to  sensual  enjoyment  were  considered  proofs  of  their  degradation 
and   pollution:  and  since  their  highest  bliss  and  glorification  on  ac- 
count of  their  relationship  with  God  consisted  in  nothing  but  their 
return   to  God,  and   in   an  entire  confluence  with  the  pure,  original 


600  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

fountain  of  their  being,  it  must  of  course  be  considered  duty  to 
withdraw  as  much  as  possible  from  every  thing  sensual,  to  free 
themselves  from  the  regular  business  of  life,  and  in  undisturbed  se- 
clusion seek  after  union  with  God."  "^ 

And  this  spirit  pervaded  the  Church  Avhen  the  Confessors  were 
called  upon  to  embody  their  views  in  regard  to  the  relations  of  Chris- 
tian men  with  the  practical  business  of  life.  Especially  was  this  true 
of  the  Anabaptists.  In  the  Formula  of  Concord,  in  Art.  XII.,  of 
Otlicr  Heresies  ajid  Sects,  under  the  head  of  "Anabaptist  Articles 
which  are  intolerable  in  the  commonwealth,"  we  find  the  following: 

1.  That  the  office  of  the  magistrate  is  not  under  the  New  Testa- 
ment a  condition  of  life  that  pleases  God. 

2.  That  a  Christian  man  cannot  discharge  the  office  of  magistrate 
with  a  safe  and  quiet  conscience. 

3.  That  a  Christian  man  cannot  with  a  safe  conscience  administer 
and  execute  the  office  of  a  magistrate,  if  matters  so  require,  against 
the  wicked,  nor  can  subjects  implore  for  their  defense  that  power 
which  the  magistrate  has  received  of  God. 

4.  That  a  Christian  man  can  not  with  a  safe  conscience  take  an 
oath,  nor  swear  obedience  and  fidelity  to  his  prince  or  magistrate. 

5.  That  the  magistrate  under  the  New  Testament  can  not,  with  a 
good  conscience,  punish  criminals  with  death. 

Also  under  the  head  of  "Anabaptist  Articles  which  cannot  be 
tolerated  in  daily  life,"  the  following: 

1.  That  a  godly  man  can  not  with  safe  conscience  hold  or  pos- 
sess any  property,  but  that  whatever  means  he  may  possess,  he  is 
bound  to  bestow  them  all  as  conmion  good. 

2.  That  a  Christian  man  can  not,  with  a  safe  conscience,  either 
keep  an  inn,  or  carry  on  trade,  or  forge  weapons. 

3.  That  it  is  permitted  married  people  who  think  differently  in 
religion  to  divorce  themselves  and  to  contract  matrimony  with 
some  other  persons  who  agree  with  them  in  religion. 

We  cannot  but  admire  theirbreadth  of  view, their  manly  courage, 
their  sound,  sense  and  their  true  interpretation  of  the  Word  of  God, 
when  the  Confessors  declared  "  that  it  is  lawful  for  Christians  to 
hold  civil  offices,  to  pronounce  judgment,  and  decide  cases  accord- 
ing to  the  imperial  and  other  existing  laws:  to  inflict  just  punish- 
ments, wage  just  wars,  and  serve  in  them;  to  make  lawful  contracts  ; 

*  Christian  Examiner. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  6oi 

hold  property;  to  make  oath  when   required  by  the  magistrates;  to 
marry  and  be  married." 

Let  us  examine  somewhat  in  detail,  what  is  here  specified. 

On  the  Lawfulness  of  Christians  to  Hold  Civil  Offices. 

The  saying  of  our  Blessed  Lord  to  "render  to  Csesar  the  things 
that  are  Caesar's,"  should  settle  the  right  and  duty  of  a  Christian 
man  to  concern  himself  with  civil  affairs.  Under  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation,  the  prophets  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  politics  of 
their  time,  either  protesting  against  the  abuses  of  justice  in  the  in- 
ternal administration  of  the  nation's  affairs,  or  criticising  without 
fear  or  favor  its  foreign  policy.  To  claim  rights,  however,  is  to  con- 
cede corresponing  duties.  The  State  offers  to  its  citizens  certain 
advantages,  such  as  security  from  foreign  foes,  protection  of  life  and 
property,  and  the  management  of  affairs  of  public  utility,  and  no  one 
has  a  right  to  accept  these  advantages  without  discharging  the  du- 
ties of  a  citizen  to  the  best  of  his  ability.  The  neglect  of  the  duties 
of  citizenship  is  selfish:  it  is  an  attempt  to  obtain  the  advantages 
enjoyed  by  our  neighbors  while  we  shrink  from  bearing  our  share 
of  the  corresponding  responsibilities.  There  are  a  thousand  things 
required  for  the  welfare  of  a  great  nation,  which  can  only  be  accom- 
plished through  its  acting  in  its  collective  capacity.  The  members 
of  a  nation  are  mutually  necessary,  and  have  duties  towards  one 
another,  just  as  the  members  of  any  other  social  body.  Suppose  all 
stood  aloof  from  civil  duties.  There  could  be  then  no  government, 
no  regulation  of  human  affairs  for  the  public  good,  because  there 
would  be  no  persons  left  to  undertake  it.  The  absurdity  of  such  a 
position  is  obvious.  No  doubt  a  man  may  be  happier  who  minds 
his  own  concerns,  and  does  not  trouble  himself  about  public  affairs. 
But  does  he  discharge  his  duties  to  his  fellow  beings  in  so  doing? 
That  he  has  such  duties  cannot  be  denied.  Our  duty  to  our  neigh- 
bor comes  next  to  our  duty  to  God.  We  are  bound  to  promote  his 
happiness  as  far  as  lies  in  our  power.  To  do  this  it  will  be  neces- 
sary to  see  to  it  that  he  is  under  good  government.  A  good  gov- 
ernment depends  in  a  great  degree  upon  its  rulers.  Our  first  duty 
then,  where  it  is  in  our  power,  is  to  secure  such  rulers  as  in  our 
judgment  will  seek  to  promote  the  legitimate  ends  of  all  good  gov- 
ernment. These  rulers  should  be  men  not  only  endowed  with  the 
requisite  talents  for  their  position,  but  likewise  men  of  pure  and 


602  t  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

unexceptionable  characters  in  private  life.  The  very  existence  of  a 
government  is  threatened,  as  well  as  the  welfare  of  the  citizens 
endangered,  when  evil-minded  and  ill-disposed  persons  are  put  in 
power,  who  will  pervert  that  power  to  promote  their  own  ends  and 
strengthen  themselves  in  office  by  rewarding  their  partisans.  If, 
therefore,  it  is  the  bounden  duty  of  every  honest  and  upright  man, 
of  every  sincere  Christain,  to  secure  rulers  who  will  only  be  a  terror 
to  the  evil  and  not  to  the  good,  then  it  is  equally  the  duty  of  every 
good  man  to  accept  office,  if  it  is  conferred  upon  him.  The  objec- 
tion to  a  Christian  taking  part  in  civil  affairs,  because  it  brings  him 
into  associations  unfavorable  to  his  piety,  is  not  well  founded.  It  is 
this  very  withdrawal  from  political  life,  which  tends  to  the  injury  of 
society  and  an  aggravation  of  the  evils  under  which  it  suffers.  Its 
result  is  to  place  the  regulation  of  trade,  the  administration  of  just- 
ice and  the  guardianship  of  the  public  purse  and  peace,  in  the  hands 
of  the  worst  of  mankind.  Surely  this  is  selfishness  under  the  mask 
of  religion,  a  cowardly  shrinking  from  necessary  perils,  and  a  distrust 
of  divine  help,  which  are  essentially  wrong. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  the  notions  and  practices  of  many  who 
teach  this  abstinence  from  the  duties  of  citizenship,  while  they  live 
luxuriously  in  a  peace  and  comfort  which  others,  secure  for  them,  are 
just  a  fresh  illustration  of  the  old  mistake  which  confounds  asceti- 
cism with  religion,  and  blasphemes  the  divine  name  by  pronouncing 
that  evil  which  God  has  ordained  for  the  well-being  and  happiness 
of  mankind.  In  our  own  republican  form  of  government,  in  which 
the  J>eo/>/c  are  regarded  as  the  only  source  of  power,  it  will  be  our 
own  fault  if  we  have  not  efficient  rulers.  With  the  elective  franchise 
in  our  possession,  it  remains  with  us  to  determine  the  character  of 
the  governing  powers.  The  exercise  of  this  right  should  be  regarded 
by  us  as  a  solemn  duty.  One  of  the  greatest  dangers  to  our  free 
institutions  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  most  disinterested  will  be 
and  are  inclined  to  neglect  this  privilege  or  duty,  leaving  thereby 
the  choice  of  our  rulers  in  the  hands  of  those  who  have  most  to 
hope  for  from  the  success  of  their  efforts.  The  theory  of  our  gov- 
ernment is  that  the  voice  of  the  people  is  the  voice  of  God.  At  least, 
the  voice  of  the  people  is  the  voiee  by  which  we  have  stipulated  to 
be  governed.  To  make,  then,  this  voice  the  voice  of  God,  we  must 
not  only  give  expression  to  it  ourselves,  by  conscientiously  using 
the  elective  franchise,  but  also  by  educating  intellectually,  morally. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  603 

and  religiously,  all  who  utter  it.  The  masses  must  be  educated.  If 
they  be  not  educated,  power  may  come  into  the  hands  of  the  few, 
and  of  the  few  who  have  the  least  stake  in  the  welfare  of  the  repub- 
licf.  The  voice  of  the  people  must  be  the  voice  of  independent  intel- 
lect, and  not  the  voice  of  bold  and  designing  men,  who  take  advan- 
tage of  ignorance  and  party  ties  to  seize  the  reins  of  power  and  pro- 
mote their  own  selfish  schemes  and  personal  ambition.  A  republican 
government  is  founded  on  the  idea  that  there  may  be  in  the  mass  of 
the  citizens  sufficient  intelligence  and  virtue  to  make  wise  laws  and 
execute  them  faithfully.  Thus  the  power  that  is  in  the  possession 
of  the  people  must  be  put  again  into  the  hands  of  the  few.  Into 
whose  hands  shall  it  be  given  ?  This  is  the  question  for  every 
honest  citizen  to  settle.  Intelligent  and  virtuous  people  will  have 
no  difficulty  in  settling  it.  The  wisest  and  best  men  in  the  com- 
munity will  be  chosen  to  be  the  depositaries  of  this  power.  By  so 
doing  our  republic  would  not  only  be  safe,  but  would  be  the  very 
ideal  of  a  perfect  government.  It  is  possible,  however,  for  a  very 
different  order  of  things  to  take  place.  Men  may  secure  office  and 
power  through  trickery  and  cunning,  through  party  management 
and  organization.  They  may  play  upon  the  ignorance  of  the  masses, 
upon  their  fears  and  hopes,  until  they  sway  them  at  their  will,  and 
cause  them  without  a  struggle  to  do  their  bidding.  In  such  cases, 
the  elective  franchise  is  not  the  free  and  spontaneous  expression  of 
the  popular  will.  It  is  simply  an  instrument  by  which  political  ad- 
venturers elevate  themselves  to  office.  The  form  of  the  republic 
may  then  remain,  but  the  spirit  has  perished.  The  elective  franchise 
exercised  in  ignorance  by  some  and  improperly  used  by  others,  is 
directly  antagonistic  to  the  spirit  of  a  free  government.  It  is  just  here 
where  our  institutions  are  in  the  greatest  danger.  Unless  the  masses 
can  be  so  educated  as  to  give  an  intelligent  and  honest  suffi-age,  they 
will  be  governed  by  a  few  for  their  own  purposes.  Their  passions 
and  prejudices  will  be  their  masters,  and  they  will  become  the  ser- 
vants of  their  servants.  Of  all  governments  such  is  the  worst,  be- 
cause it  is  the  government  of  a  deluded  or  intimidated  multitude. 
To  elevate  the  masses  therefore  is  a  religious  duty.  It  is  equally  a 
religious  duty  to  seek  moral  and  religious  worth,  as  essential  quali- 
fications for  high  public  station.  Whoever  then  has  moral  and  re- 
ligious worth,  whoever  is  so  situated  as  to  render  him  in  the  opin- 
ion of  his  fellow-citizens  a  suitable  person  for  public  office,  has  not 


604  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

only  a  right  to  accept  such  office  when  tendered,  but  is  inexcusable 
if  he  holds  back  upon  private  motives. 

On  Giving  Judgment  and  Deciding  Cases  According  to  hA\\. 
If  it  is  lawful  for  Christians  to  hold  civil  offices,  then  it  legiti- 
mately follows  that  the  duties  connected  with  such  offices  must  be 
discharged  by  them.  To  pronounce  judgment  and  decide  cases, 
naturally  grow  out  of  the  proper  execution  of  the  laws,  which  every 
government  finds  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  its  own  existence, 
and  for  the  protection  of  the  interests  of  society.  Perhaps  there  is 
no  duty  which  the  magistrate  is  called  upon  to  perform  more  fre- 
quently than  "to  inflict  just  punishment"  for  offences  committed. 
This  subject  of  puishment  has  occasioned  much  discussion,  and 
given  rise  to  a  great  variety  of  opinions.  The  Confessors  undoubt- 
edly occupied  the  right  ground,  when  they  maintained  that  it  was 
proper  "  to  inflict  just  punishment."  Punishment,  in  its  most  gen- 
eral sense,  is  defined  to  be  the  infliction  of  some  evil  upon  an  indi- 
vidual, with  the  intention  that  he  should  suffer  this  evil,  and  with  a 
reference  to  some  act  done  or  omitted.  In  its  legal  sense,  punish- 
ment is  the  infliction  of  some  evil,  according  to  judicial  forms,  upon 
an  individual  convicted  of  some  act  forbidden  by  laiv,  and  with  the 
intention  of  preventing  the  recurrence  of  such  acts.  That  punish- 
ment for  crime  is  justifiable  is  almost  self-evident.  Laws  must  be 
made  against  crimes  which  strike  at  the  great  objects  of  civil  society, 
and  these  laws  must  have  an  efficient  sanction.  Says  Jeremy  Ben- 
tham:*  "  If  we  were  to  regard  the  crime  which  has  been  committed 
as  an  insulated  event  that  could  not  recur,  the  punishment  would  be 
wholly  thrown  away:  it  would  be  only  adding  one  evil  to  another. 
But  when  we  consider  that  a  crime  left  unpunished  would  leave  the 
way  towards  the  same  offence  open  both  to  the  former  delinquent 
and  to  all  others  under  the  influence  of  similar  motives,  we  come  to 
view  the  putfishment  inflicted  upon  the  individual  as  a  safeguard  to 
all.  Punishment,  however  vile  an  instrument  in  itself,  and  however 
repugnant  to  generous  sentiments,  rises  into  a  blessing  of  the  high- 
est order,  when  regarded,  not  as  an  act  of  anger  or  resentment 
against  a  guilty  or  an  unfortunate  person  who  has  yielded  to  hurtful 
propensities,  but  as  a  sacrifice  indispensably  necessary  to  the  public 
safety."  This  opinion  is  a  sufficient  answer  to  the  objections  of 
*Bentham's  Theory  of  Punishment,  Ed.  Rev.,  Vol.  XXII,  page  5. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  605 

many,  who  say  that  punishment  cannot  remedy  the  evil  committed 
— that  it  cannot  revive  the  man  who  has  been  murdered  by  kilHng 
the  murderer,  nor  rebuild  the  dwelling  which  is  burned  by  destroy- 
ing the  perpetrator  of  the  ruin;  and  that  to  do  so  can  be  defended 
on  no  better  principle  than  the  unchristian  spirit  of  revenge.  Re- 
venge does  not  enter  into  the  idea  of  "just  punishment."  If  society 
cannot  punish  a  wrong-doer  without  malice,  neither  can  God.  Pun- 
ishment is  inflicted  to  make  crime  odious,  and  to  prevent  its  further 
commission  upon  the  part  of  the  perpetrator  of  the  crime,  or  the  re- 
maining members  of  society.  It  is  true  that  punishment  is  only  one 
of  the  agents  which  society  has  at  its  conmiand  for  the  prevention 
of  crime,  but  it  is  a  very  important  one.  The  fact  that  it  must  be 
called  upon  when  all  other  means  have  failed  proves  its  absolute 
necessity.  It  shows  that  the  magistrate  bears  the  sword  by  divine 
appointment,  and  inflicts  punishment  in  defence  of  society.  And 
this  punishment  in  certain  contingencies  may  extend  even  to  the 
taking  of  life.  Especially  is  this  true  for  the  extreme  crime  of  mur- 
der, to  which  the  practice,  if  not  the  letter,  of  our  law  has  been  con- 
formed. 

This  right  has  been  questioned,  and  where  it  has  not  been  called 
into  question,  the  propriety  of  it  has  been  challenged.  It  is  not  our 
design  to  enter  into  a  lengthy  discussion  upon  this  subject.  Vol- 
umes have  been  written,  and  ably  written,  upon  it.  In  a  condensed 
form  it  has  been  treated  in  a  masterly  manner  by  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker  in  his  "Popular  Theology."  Both  the  right  and  expe- 
diency of  it  are  there  fully  pointed  out  and  established.  It  may  be 
sufficient  to  say  that  the  weight  of  authority  is  upon  the  side  of 
capital  punishment  for  murder.  The  Bible  evidently  sanctions  the 
right  of  civil  government  to  inflict  it.  No  ingenuity  can  alter  the 
plain  declaration,  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall  his 
blood  be  shed;  for  in  the  image  of  God  made  he  man,"  Gen.  i.\.  6. 
Neither  can  any  sophistry  overthrow  the  fact  that  the  Apostle 
Paul  recognized  capital  punishment  among  the  powers  of  civil  mag- 
istrates. No  other  interpretation  can  be  given  to  these  declara- 
tions: "But  if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid, /<?/'  lie  bcareth 
not  the  siuord  in  vain  ;  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God,  a  revenger  of 
God  to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil."  "  I  stand  at 
Caesar's  judgment  seat,  where  I  ought  to  be  judged:  to  the  Jews 
have  I  done  no  wrong,  as  thou  very  well  knowcst.     For  if  I  be  an 


6o6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

offender,  or  have  committed  anything  ivorthy  of  death,  I  refuse  not  to 
die :  but  if  there  be  none  of  these  these  things  whereof  these  accuse 
me,  no  man  may  deliver  me  unto  them.  I  appeal  unto  Caesar." 
Neither  can  it  be  denied  that  the  punishment  of  death  is  peculiarly 
appropriate  in  the  crime  of  murder,  and  that  notwithsthanding  all 
the  diminutions  of  its  efficacy,  it  presents  to  the  mind  an  antago- 
nistic idea  most  fit  to  encounter  the  temptation  to  the  crime.  At 
least  it  has  always  been  the  impression  of  mankind,  throughout  the 
ages,  that  the  penalty  of  death  should  be  inflicted  upon  the  mur- 
derer whenever  that  penalty  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the 
lives  of  others,  and  for  the  safety  and  defence  of  the  community. 
Says  a  writer  in  the  BibliotJieca  Sacra:^'  "  In  defence  of  these  posi- 
tions, we  appeal  to  tlie  common  consent  and  consciousness  of  man- 
kind, and  to  a  deep  and  indestructible  instinct  of  the  human  heart : 
a  consent  of  consciousness  impressed  upon  the  pages  of  all  history, 
both  sacred  and  profane:  exhibited  with  a  few  trifling  and  partial 
exceptions  in  the  legislation  and  practice  of  all  nations,  ancient  and 
modern,  barbarous  and  civilized,  pagan  and  Jewish,  classical  and 
Christian:  a  universal  instinct,  which  began  to  utter  itself  in  the 
conscience- stricken  exclamations  of  the  terrified  Cain,  and  which 
has  reverberated  in  the  soul  of  every  murderer  from  that  day  to 
this:  which  has  been  confirmed  by  the  consenting  voice  of  the  poets, 
philosophers  and  sages  of  all  time,  and  which,  as  we  believe,  finds  a 
response  more  or  less  distinct  in  every  unsophisticated  human 
heart."  This  punishment,  and  all  other  "just  punishments, '  being 
therefore  right  and  proper,  it  remains  only  for  every  government  so 
to  execute  its  laws  that  they  will  not  be  trifled  with  or  trampled 
upon  with  impunity.  Let  it  be  understood  that  the  law  cannot  be 
evaded,  and  that  punishment  will  inevitably  follow  its  violation,  and 
not  only  will  the  law  itself  be  more  respected,  but  punishment,  in  a 
great  degree,  will  be  lessened,  and  society  be  better  protected. 

On  War. 

Passing  from  this  subject,  we  come  to  the  declaration  that  it  is 
lawful  "to  wage  just  wars  and  serve  in  them." 

There  are  many  eminently  good  persons  who  believe  that  all  war 
is  opposed  to  Christianity,  that  it  is  wrong  in  its  origin,  in  its  prin- 
ciples, in  its  motives,  in  its  means  and  all  its  legitimate  results.    Al- 

*Bib,  Sacra,  Vol.  L.,  page  286. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  607 

most  from  the  very  beginning  of  Christianity  down  to  the  present 
time,  men  have  borne  their  testimony  against  it.  The  absolute  in- 
consistency of  war  with  the  Gospel,  was  the  prevalent  belief  of  the 
early  Christians.  Justin  Martyr,  quoting  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah, 
"they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  ploughshares,  and  their  spears 
into  pruning  hooks:  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation, 
neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more,"  says,  "  That  these  things 
have  come  to  pass,  you  may  be  already  convinced ;  for  we  who 
were  once  slayers  of  one  another,  do  not  now  fight  against  our  ene- 
mies." Irenaeus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  discusses  the  same  prophecy, 
and  proves  its  relation  to  our  Saviour  by  the  fact  that  the  followers 
of  Jesus  had  neglected  the  weapons  of  war,  and  no  longer  knew 
how  to  fight.  Tertullian  says,  "  Custom  can  never  sanction  an  un- 
lawful act.  And  can  a  soldier's  life  be  lawful  when  Christ  has  said 
that  he  who  lives  by  the  sword  shall  perish  by  the  sword?  Can 
any  one  who  professes  the  peaceable  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  be  a 
soldier?"  Origen,  in  his  work  against  Celsus,  says,  "  We  no  longer 
take  up  the  sword  against  any  nation,  nor  do  we  learn  any  more  to 
make  war.  We  have  become,  for  the  sake  of  Jesus,  the  children  of 
peace.  By  our  prayers  we  fight  for  our  king  abundantly,  but  take 
no  part  in  his  wars  even  though  he  urge  us."  Lactantius,  who 
wrote  during  the  reign  of  Diocletian,  expressly  asserts  that  "  to  en- 
gage in  war  cannot  be  lawful  for  the  righteous  man,  whose  warfare 
is  that  of  righteousness  itself  In  the  twelfth  canon  of  the  Council 
of  Nice,  held  under  the  reign  of  Constantine  in  325,  we  read,  "A 
long  period  of  exconmiunication  is  attached  as  a  penalty  to  the  con- 
duct of  those  persons  who,  having  once  renounced  the  military  call- 
ing, were  persuaded  by  the  force  of  bribes  to  return  to  it.  Such  a 
law  would  scarcely  have  been  promulgated  had  not  an  opinion  been 
entertained  in  the  council,  that  ^var  itself  \^  inconsistent  with  the 
highest  standard  of  Christian  morality."  And  thus  down  through 
the  ages  and  among  all  denominations  of  Christians,  multitudes  are 
found  expressing  similar  opinions.  To  such,  Christianity  and  war 
are  irreconcilable.  "Christianity,"  say  they,  "  saves  men;  war  de- 
stroys them.  Christianity  elevates  men  ;  war  debases  and  degrades 
them.  Christianity  purifies  men  ;  war  corrupts  and  defiles  them. 
Christianity  blesses  men ;  war  curses  them.  God  says,  thou  shalt 
not  kill;  war  says,  thou  shalt  kill.  God  says,  blessed  are  the  peace- 
makers; war  says,  blessed  are  the  war-makers.    God  says,  love  your 


6o8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

enemies;  war  says,  hate  them.  God  says,  forgive  men  their  tres- 
passes; war  says,  forgive  them  not.  God  enjoins  forgiveness  and 
forbids  revenge ;  while  war  scorns  the  former  and  commends  the 
latter.  God  says,  resist  not  evil ;  war  says,  you  may  and  must  resist 
evil.  God  says,  if  any  man  smite  thee  on  one  cheek,  turn  to  him 
the  other  also ;  war  says,  turn  not  the  other  cheek,  but  knock  the 
smiter  down.  God  says,  bless  those  who  curse  you  ;  war  says, 
curse  those  who  curse  you — curse  and  bless  not.  God  says,  pray 
for  those  who  despitefully  use  you;  war  says,  •^xd.y  against  them 
and  seek  their  destruction.  God  says,  see  that  none  render  evil  for 
evil  unto  any  man  ;  war  says,  be  sure  to  render  evil  for  evil  unto  all 
that  injure  you.  God  says,  overcome  evil  with  good ;  war  says, 
overcome  evil  with  evil.  God  says  to  all  men,  love  one  another ; 
war  says,  hate  and  kill  one  another.  God  says,  they  that  take  the 
sword  shall  perish  by  the  sword ;  war  says,  they  that  take  the  sword 
shall  be  saved  by  the  sword.  God  says,  beat  your  swords  into 
ploughshares,  your  spears  into  pruning  hooks,  and  learn  war  no 
more;  war  says,  make  swords  and  spears  still,  and  continue  to  learn 
war." 

Sometimes  the  argument  against  war  is  drawn  from  its  horrors. 
What  is  war,  say  they,  but  the  destruction  of  men ;  and  who  can 
contemplate  for  a  moment  what  the  destruction  means  without  sor- 
row of  heart?  Men  are  sent  to  the  battle-field,  and  what  does  that 
mean  ?  It  means  that  a  very  large  number  of  them  will  perish  in  the 
conflict,  and  that  a  greater  number  perhaps  will  be  wounded  and 
incapacitated  for  the  active  duties  of  life.  It  means  that  human  life 
will  be  taken  away  under  the  most  horrible  forms.  Surely  such 
things  cannot  be  right!  Surely  war  is  nothing  else  than  folly,  guilt 
and  mischief! 

Now  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  spirit  of  war  is  condemned  by 
the  genius  of  Christianity.  And  by  the  spirit  of  war  we  mean  a 
warlike  spirit,  a  desire  for  war,  or  a  readiness  for  war.  Such  a  spirit 
is  repugnant  to  the  spirit  of  religion.  It  is  repugnant  to  it  because 
it  mostly  springs  from  vain-glory,  revenge  and  sordid  ambition. 
And  wars  arising  from  these  evil  tendencies  are  opposed  to  the 
genius  of  religion.  Christianity  frowns  upon  them.  Christianity 
has  nothing  to  do  with  vain-glory,  or  revenge,  or  sordid  ambition, 
but  to  condemn  the  whole  of  them.  But  that  just  wars  are  opposed 
to  Christianity  is  another  question.     We  know  that  mankind  are 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  609 

made  for  society  :  society  requires  government,  and  a  government 
without  penalties,  or  without  the  right  and  power  to  enforce  its  pen- 
alties, and  coerce  the  obedience  of  its  own  subjects,  would  be  not 
only  a  nullity  in  practice,  but  a  contradiction  in  terms.  In  the  pres- 
ent state  of  society  we  cannot  dispense  with  the  use  of  force;  and 
if  force  be  used  at  all,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  draw  a  distinction  be- 
tween the  use  of  it  in  one  form  and  another.  If  force  be  at  all  law- 
ful, it  must  be  used  to  accomplish  the  desired  end.  We  do  employ 
it  in  the  prevention  or  repression  of  crime  and  rebellion.  If  this  is 
allowable,  how  is  it  possible  to  distinguish  between  the  use  of  phys- 
ical force  for  internal  security,  and  its  employment  for  the  defense 
of  a  country  against  external  aggression  ?  In  the  latter  case,  the 
prowess  of  the  battle-field  is  neither  more  nor  less  glorious  than  the 
courage  and  fidelity  to  duty  shown  by  a  policeman  in  capturing  a 
desperate  burglar. 

"Civil  society,"  says  Wayland,  "  assumes  the  responsibility  of  pro- 
tecting the  rights  of  the  individual.  Having  assumed  this  duty,  it  is 
under  obligation  to  discharge  it.  If  it  cannot  be  discharged  without 
the  use  of  force,  it  is  authorized  to  use  force  to  the  extent  which  the 
obligation  that  it  has  assumed  renders  necessary.  In  order  to  pre- 
vent wrong,  it  has  a  right  to  summon  to  its  aid  the  assistance  of 
every  citizen,  and  he  is  bound  to  render  it.  Every  individual  is  a 
member  of  that  society  which  has  promised  to  secure  to  his  brother 
the  enjoyment  of  those  rights  bestowed  upon  him  by  his  Creator; 
and  that  promise  every  man  is  under  moral  obligation  to  redeem^ 
But  suppose  that  he  is  exposed  to  mjury  from  a  member  of  another 
society,  is  he  not  entitled  to  the  same  protection?  It  seems  to  me 
that  he  is;  and  that  the  society  to  which  he  belongs  is  bound  to  pro- 
tect him,  whether  he  be  assailed  by  one  or  many.  It  is  the  duty  of 
the  society  to  which  he  belongs  to  restrain  liiin  from  inflicting  in- 
jury upon  all  other  men,  and  to  prevent  all  other  men  from  inflicting 
injury  upon  him."  "*'  In  regard  to  the  maxims  of  Christianity,  such  as 
"  Resist  not  evil :  but  whosoever  shall  smite  thee  on  the  right  cheek, 
turn  to  him  the  other  also,"  which  are  supposed  to  teach  that  all 
war  is  wrong,  it  has  been  justly  held  that  they  are  undoubtedly  pre- 
cepts regulative  rather  of  personal  and  private  action  than  declara- 
tive of  the  procedure  of  governments  and  states.  They  are  strong 
expressions,  intimating  the  necessity  of  a  firm  curb  on  our  passions, 

*  University  Sermons. 


6lO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

rather  than  that  never  is  evil  to  be  resisted  or  wrong-doing  sup- 
pressed by  force.  If  they  can  be  hterally  interpreted  so  as  to  incul- 
cate that  all  war — war  of  defence  for  instance,  for  dearest  liberty  and 
rights  is  contrary  to  Christianity,  then  by  the  same  method  of  inter- 
pretation governments  and  magistrates  are  also  so  contrary.  The 
sword  is  their  emblem  and  force  is  their  argument,  and  plainly  are 
they  spoken  of  as  the  ordinance  of  God,  whose  duty  it  is  not  to  bear 
the  sword  in  vain,  to  be  a  terror  to  the  ill-doer  and  a  praise  to  them 
that  do  well.  While,  however,  just  wars  may  be  waged,  how  rarely 
does  the  occasion  arise  which  will  justify  war.  The  great  mass  of 
wars  when  tested  by  the  maxims  of  Christian  principle  and  prudence 
will  be  found  wanting.  Such  are  wars  of  ambition,  undertaken  for 
national  glory  and  aggrandizement,  wars  of  retaliation  and  revenge, 
predatory  wars,  wars  of  conquest  and  propagandism.  For  such 
wars  we  make  no  defence.  They  are  unjust  wars,  or  "murder  on  a 
large  scale."  But  there  is  a  vast  distinction  between  such  wars  and 
a  war  waged  to  suppress  domestic  insurrection,  or  to  repel  foreign 
invasion.  In  the  case  of  domestic  insurrection,  the  very  existence 
of  the  government  itself  is  threatened.  Two  paramount  authorities 
can  not  exist  in  the  same  state.  One  must  put  the  other  down. 
This  is  civil  war,  and  no  matter  how  bloody  the  struggle  may  be- 
come, both  God  and  man  will  acquit  the  government  that  seeks  to 
uphold  its  authority  and  restore  law  and  order  throughout  the  land. 
In  the  case  of  foreign  invasion,  a  government  would  be  recreant  to 
its  trust  that  did  not  strain  every  nerve  not  only  to  maintain  its  own 
independence,  but  also  to  protect  its  citizens  in  the  rights  of  person 
or  property.  The  instinct  of  property  and  the  instinct  of  self- 
preservation  come  immediately  from  God.  To  preserve  these  rights 
governments  are  instituted.  They  are  to  protect  that  which  God 
has  made  most  sacred  upon  earth.  In  an  invasion  this  protection 
can  only  be  exercised  by  a  resort  to  the  sword;  and  that  govern- 
ment that  will  not  resort  to  it,  is  false  to  its  trust  and  beareth  the 
sword  in  vain.  And  yet  it  must  be  conceded  that  while  under  cer- 
tain circumstances  war  may  be  justifiable,  it  is,  nevertheless,  even  in 
its  mildest  form,  a  dreadful  evil.  We  should  dread  it  as  we  do  the 
ravages  of  disease  or  a  strike  of  the  pestilence.  Let  it  ever  be  de- 
scribed so  as  to  excite  aversion  instead  of  pleasure  and  applause. 
And  let  us  hope  that  as  Christianity  is  better  understood  and  be- 
comes   more   prevalent,  the    differences   between    nations   and   indi- 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  6ll 

viduals  will  not  be  settled  by  mortal  combat,  but  by  peaceful  arbi- 
tration. May  that  golden  age  soon  come  when  men  will  be 
astonished  at  the  barbarity  of  past  ages,  at  the  pretexts  assigned  for 
acts  of  outrage  and  aggression,  at  our  armaments  and  military  en- 
gines, at  our  needle  guns  and  howitzers  and  "peace-makers;"  our 
Enfield  rifles,  revolvers,  and  bowie-knives,  and  the  whole  family  ot 
deadly  projectiles. 

On  Lawful  Contracts. 
As  all  rights,  all  duties,  all  obligations  and  all  law,  grow  out  of 
contracts,  the  necessity  of  such  contracts  and  the  power  of  their 
enforcement  by  law  is  self-evident.  We  shall  not  therefore  enter 
into  the  discussion  of  this  subject,  but  pass  on  to  the  consideration 
of  the  next  item,  viz.. 

On  Holding  Property. 
The  right  to  hold  property  seems  to  be  inherent  in  our  nature. 
Appropriation  and  production  are  born  with  us.  From  our  very 
childhood  we  aim  to  acquire  something  that  we  may  call  our  own. 
This  desire  for  possession  lies  at  the  root  of  everything  good  in 
society.  It  stirs  up  man  to  industry,  it  promotes  individual  inde- 
pendence, it  is  the  basis  of  social  advancement,  it  is  the  producer  of 
general  prosperity,  it  binds  society  together,  it  is  the  friend  of  law 
and  order  and  good  government.  The  advantages  of  property  are 
thus  stated  by  Dr.  Paley:  "  i.  It  increases  the  produce  of  the  earth. 
The  earth  produces  little  without  cultivation;  and  none  would  be 
found  willing  to  cultivate  the  ground  if  others  were  to  be  admitted 
to  an  equal  share  of  the  produce.  2.  It  preserves  the  produce  of 
the  earth  to  maturity.  3.  It  prevents  contests.  War  and  waste, 
tumult  and  confusion,  must  be  unavoidable  and  eternal  where  there 
is  not  enough  for  all,  and  where  there  are  no  rules  to  adjust  the 
division.  4.  It  improves  the  conveniency  of  living.  This  it  does 
in  two  ways.  It  enables  mankind  to  divide  themselves  into  distinct 
professions;  and  it  likewise  encourages  those  arts  by  which  the 
accommodations  of  human  life  are  supplied,  by  appropriating  to  the 
artist  the  benefit  of  his  discoveries  and  improvements ;  without 
which  appropriation  ingenuity  will  never  be  exerted  with  effect."* 
It  has  been  maintained,  however,  that  the  right  to  hold  property  is  a 

^  Paley's  Theology. 


6l2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

concession  to  human  selfishness,  and  was  introduced  by  violence  or 
cupidity  under  the  artificial  systems  of  government  belonging  to 
degenerate  times.  The  chief  instances  usually  adduced  as  proofs 
are,  "the  common  hunting  tribes  of  the  North  American  Indians; 
Caesar's  mention  that  private  and  separate  property  in  the  soil  was 
unknown  to  the  Germans;  the  fact  that  the  patriarchs  had  no  fixed 
habitations,  roaming  with  their  herds  wherever  they  listed;  and  that 
the  Jewish  government  recognized  to  a  certain  extent  a  community 
of  property,  as  seen  in  the  edicts  connected  with  the  year  of  Jubilee." 
And  yet  when  these  cases  are  properly  sifted,  there  is  nothing  in 
them.  As  it  has  been  rightly  observed,  so  long  as  a  hunting  ground 
was  valuable  the  tribe  in  possession  of  it  excluded  all  others  from  it. 
The  pasture  grounds  occupied  by  the  patriarchs  were  forbidden  to 
any  stranger  leading  his  herds  thither,  while  everything  which  had 
individual  value  in  their  eyes,  their  camels,  horses,  cattle,  their  tents 
and  arms,  they  possessed  separately.  The  Germans,  while  they 
cared  little  for  the  land  in  itself,  yet  claimed  the  growing  crop  as 
the  reward  of  their  labors.  The  Jewish  scheme  of  government  was 
not  only  peculiar  but  unique,  and  whatever  relations  they  sustained 
to  Jehovah  as  land  owners,  do  not  obtain  with  us  any  more  than 
numberless  other  principles  of  the  Mosaic  code  which  are  wholly 
inapplicable  to  our  state  of  things.  It  is  true  that  some  of  the  early 
theologians  thought  that  the  view  of  an  original  common  property 
was  supported  by  passages  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  it  is 
related  that  the  first  Christians  "possessed  all  things  in  common." 
But  as  it  has  been  justly  remarked  :  "  If  the  Bible  seems  to  support 
the  theory  of  original  common  property  or  of  its  general  preferable- 
ness  in  some  passages,  we  ought  not  to  forget  others  which  indicate 
the  contrary.  Of  the  six  commandments  which,  to  distinguish  them 
from  the  others  of  a  more  strictly  religious  character,  may  be  called 
ethical,  two  relate  to  thesacredness  of  private  property.  We  should 
not  even  covet  our  neighbor's  property ;  and  the  code  of  Moses 
curses  him  that  removes  the  landmark."  *  The  Bible  rather  encour- 
ages the  posession  of  individual  property.  It  teaches  that  the  laws 
of  God's  providence  reward  industry,  skill,  uprightness,  with  temporal 
prosperity.  It  nowhere  condemns  men  for  being  rich,  but  only  for 
the  improper  use  of  riches.  Sometimes  the  argument  against  hold- 
ing property  is  based  upon  the  idea  that  its  pursuit  and  its  possession 

*  Liber,  on  Property  and  Labor. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  613 

are  detrimental  to  the  Christian  character.  The  occupations  of  men 
are  branded  as  radically  faulty  and  vicious,  as  in  themselves  earthly 
and  worldlv.  A  distinction  is  sousjht  to  be  drawn  between  things 
sacred  and  secular,  and  of  course  to  the  manifest  disadvantage  of  the 
latter.  But  this  very  distinction  is  immoral  and  mischievous.  It  is 
divorcing  religion  from  common  life,  and  teaching  men  that  it  is 
impossible  to  conduct  their  business  according  to  the  laws  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Man  is  a  being  of  two  worlds,  of  the  seen  and  unseen,  and 
the  duties  pertaining  to  each  are  both  from  God.  If  it  is  his  duty  to 
love  the  Lord  his  God  with  all  his  heart  and  mind  and  strength,  it 
is  equally  his  duty  to  provide  for  his  own  and  be  ready  to  help  his 
neighbor.  To  provide  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  all  men,  lifts 
human  toil  from  its  drudgery  and  gilds  it  with  the  light  of  heaven. 
Labor  has  undoubtedly  its  place  in  the  economy  of  God's  providence 
for  the  supply  of  human  wants.  It  may  not  be  the  highest  form  of 
religious  service,  but  still  it  is  an  office  in  a  divine  order.  Nay,  we 
go  further,  and  assert  that  our  very  employments  in  our  daily  com- 
mon life,  are  part  of  the  divine  economy  to  further  the  soul's  weigh- 
tiest interests,  and  develop  a  true,  genuine  Christian  character.  It 
is  not  by  separating  ourselves  from  the  stirring  interests  and  pur- 
suits of  life  that  we  are  best  disciplined  for  usefulness  and  happiness. 
We  are  only  rightly  developed  amid  hardships  to  be  endured  and 
conflicts  to  be  met.  There  can  be  no  better  field  in  which  to  show 
the  power  and  grace  of  God,  than  amidst  the  busiest  stir  of  secular 
pursuits.  To  be  spiritually  minded  amid  toils  and  difficulties  is  a 
nobler  achievement  than  to  be  spiritually  minded  amid  solitude  and 
repose.  Such  being  the  case,  why  should  a  man  be  forbidden  to 
mingle  in  the  business  of  active  and  intelligent  life,  to  be  industrious 
in  every  proper  and  lawful  calling,  and  to  reap  the  fruits  of  his  indi- 
vidual enterprise  and  skill?  Surely  a  man  may  be  a  man  of  faith,  of 
prayer  and  of  God,  who  seeks  through  the  lawful  pursuits  of  daily 
life  not  only  to  supply  his  own  immediate  wants,  but  also  to  place 
himself  beyond  the  wants  of  the  hour,  and  become  an  instrument  in 
God's  hands  to  be  a  benefactor  to  others.  This  is  certainly  God's 
plan;  apian  that  is  a  stimulus  to  industry;  apian  that  awakens 
responsibility;  a  plan  that  calls  forth  individual  endowments;  a 
plan  that  accords  with  man's  sense  of  right;  a  plan  which  the  uni- 
versal experience  of  mankind  in  all  ages  has  proven  the  wisest  and 
best,  and  most  effective  in  its  general  results.  To  have  a  community 
40 


6l4  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  goods  would  require  that  men  should  be  constituted  differently; 
that  there  should  be  no  difference  of  body,  of  mind,  or  of  tempera- 
ment ;  otherwise  the  idle  and  the  wasteful  and  the  improvident 
would  be  a  drag  upon  the  enterprising  and  industrious,  and  soon 
reduce  the  whole  race  to  starvation. 

On  the  Lawfulness  of  the  Oath,  when  Required  by  the  Mag- 
istrate. 
An  oath  is  defined  to  be  "the  calling  upon  God  to  witness,  i.  e., 
to  take  notice  of  what  we  say,  and  invoking  his  vengeance,  or 
renouncing  his  favor,  if  what  we  say  be  false,  or  what  we  promise  be 
not  performed."  Says  another,  "  It  is  a  religious  assertion,  or  assev- 
eration, wherein  a  person  invokes  the  Almighty,  renounces  all  claim 
to  His  mercy,  or  even  calls  for  the  divine  vengeance  upon  himself 
if  he  speaks  falsely."*  According  to  another  authority,  it  is  defined 
as  follows:  "Oath;  Saxon,  eoth, — \^2X.  parame7itiim — an  affirma- 
tion or  denial  of  anything  before  one  or  more  persons,  who  have 
authority  to  administer  the  same,  for  the  discovery  and  advance- 
ment of  truth  and  right:  calling  God  to  witness  that  the  testimony 
is  true."t  "An  oath  is  an  appeal  to  some  superior  being,  calling 
upon  him  to  bear  witness  that  the  swearer  speaks  the  truth,  or 
intends  to  perform  the  promise  which  he  makes."  %  Still  another 
definition  is  as  follows :  "  A  lawful  oath  is  an  act  of  religious  wor- 
ship, appointed  by  God,  as  a  means  of  promoting  truth  and  confi- 
dence, in  which  act  of  worship  the  presence  of  God  is  solemnly 
recognized,  his  omniscience,  justice  and  supreme  authority  are 
acknowledged;  and  in  which  the  juror  enters  into  a  special  cove- 
nant with  God  and  with  society  to  speak  or  act  truthfully — calling 
upon  God  to  witness  what  he  affirms  or  promises,  and  to  inflict  the 
tempo)-al  and  eternal  penalties  of  perjury  if  the  truth  be  not  spoken. "§ 
The  forms  of  oaths  have  in  all  ages  been  various.  Amongst  the 
Jews  it  was  the  custom  to  hold  up  the  right  hand  towards 
heaven.  This  undoubtedly  was  the  most  ancient  form.  Abraham 
is  said  to  have  told  the  king  of  Sodom,  "  I  have  lifted  up  my  hand 
unto  the  Lord,  the  Most  High  God,  that  I  will  not  take  anything 
that  is  thine,"  i.  e.,  I  have  szvorn  by  the  Lord  the  Most  High  God. 
And  this  form  of  the  oath  seems  also  most  appropriate.     The  lifting 

*  Reese's  Ency.,  art.  Oath.  t  Law  Dictionary  by  Jacobs. 

X  Smith's  Die.  Gr.  and  Rom.  Ant.  ^Junkin  on  the  Oath. 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  615 

up  of  the  hand  towards  heaven  is  a  direct  appeal  to  that  dread  tri- 
bunal where  the  secrets  of  all  hearts  at  last  shall  be  revealed.  Even 
the  Divine  Being  is  represented  as  saying,  "  I  lift  up  my  hand  to 
heaven,  and  say,  I  live  forever,"  Deut.  xxxii.  40.  The  heavenly  mes- 
senger whom  Daniel  saw  in  vision  (Dan.  xii.  7),  "held  up  his  right 
hand  and  his  left  hand  unto  heaven,  and  swore  by  Him  that  liveth 
forever."  The  angel  of  the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  x.  5,  6),  "  lifted  up  his 
hand  to  Heaven  and  swore  by  Him  that  liveth  forever  and  ever." 
Amongst  the  Greeks  and  Romans  the  form  varied  with  the  subject 
and  occasion  of  the  oath.  Sometimes  the  contracting  parties  took 
hold  of  each  other's  hand  and  swore  to  the  performance  of  what 
they  had  promised;  at  other  times  they  touched  the  altar  of  the  god, 
by  whose  divinity  they  swore.  "  Anciently,"  says  a  learned  Greek 
archaeologist,  "  the  person  who  took  an  oath  stood  up,  and  lifted  his 
hands  to  heaven,  as  in  prayer;  for  an  oath  was  a  species  of  prayer, 
and  required  the  same  ceremony."*  In  many  Christian  coun- 
tries, the  most  common  form  of  the  oath  is  that  of  holding  the  hand 
upon  the  Bible,  or  the  Gospels,  whilst  taking  the  oath,  and  after- 
wards kissing  the  volume.  In  our  own  country,  all  persons  are  per- 
mitted to  affirm,  upon  expressing  their  preference  for  this  substitute 
of  oath.  Whatever  the  form  may  be,  the  obligations  of  an  oath  are 
not  affected  by  it,  nor  do  they  depend  upon  it.  "  When  a  man  con- 
sents to  testify  before  a  lawful  tribunal,  no  matter  in  what  form  his 
consent  is  expresssed,  he  ipso  facto  places  himself  in  the  position  of 
one  under  oath ;  and  so  is  held  in  the  view  of  God  and  society. 
The  truth  of  this  position  is  recognized  in  all  our  laws  against  per- 
jury, in  which  a  violation  of  truth,  by  a  witness  under  affirmation,  is 
held  to  be  perjurj'',  as  fully  as  if  the  oath  had  been  administered  in 
due  form."f  Dissatisfaction  with  the  law  and  practice  of  judicial 
oaths  is  a  thing  of  long  standing  in  the  world.  The  class  of  per- 
sons who  believe  the  taking  of  an  oath  to  be  forbidden  by  their  duty 
towards  God,  is  a  class  of  by  no  means  recent  origin.  It  is  spread 
over  twenty-five  centuries  of  history.  "Greek  philosophers  have 
expressed  their  dissatisfaction  with  Hebrew  Rabbis  and  Church 
fathers,  Jewish  Essenes  with  Christian  Quakers,  religious  mystics 
and  enthusiasts  with  disciples  of  the  philosophy  of  Utility."  In  the 
early  Christian  Church  there  was  a  diversity  of  opinion  upon  the  sub- 
ject. This  opinion  appears  to  have  been  divided  between  the  abso- 
*  Smith's  Die.  Gr.  and  Rom.  Antiq.  f  Junkin  on  the  Oath. 


6l6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

lute  refusal  of  oaths  and  a  strong  dislike  to  them.  The  refusal  and 
the  dislike  were  based  upon  such  precepts  as  "  Swear  not  at  all,"  and 
"  Above  all  things,  my  brethren,  swear  not."  In  later  times,  the  more 
thorough-going  and  radical  sects,  have  for  the  most  part  revived  this 
article  of  the  primitive  Christian  morality.  The  objection  to  oaths, 
therefore,  is  not  a  thing  of  recent  origin.  As  an  intellectual  convic- 
tion, a  moral  feeling  or  a  religious  scruple,  it  has  existed  under  very 
various  forms,  in  times  and  countries  far  remote  from  each  other,  and 
in  connection  with  the  widest  possible  diversities  of  opinion  in  other 
matters.  And  yet,  notwithstanding  all  this,  the  great  mass  of  man- 
kind in  all  ages  have  deemed  oaths  to  be  right  and  lawful.  The 
testimony  of  the  great  body  of  the  Christian  Church  has  been  in 
favor  of  their  use.  As  an  element  of  social  government,  the  oath 
has  been  employed  since  the  first  organization  of  society  among 
men.  Long  experience  has  confirmed  its  value  in  all  lands.  We 
do  not  hesitate  therefore  to  assert,  that  oaths  are  both  lawful  and 
Scriptural.  They  are  lawful,  because  by  compelling  a  man  to  testify 
truly,  the  ends  of  justice  are  promoted  and  the  public  safety  secured. 
They  are  lawful,  because  by  the  solemn  sanctions  they  impose,  con- 
fidence is  established  between  man  and  man,  putting  thereby  an  end 
to  strife  and  increasing  social  comfort.  They  are  lawful,  because 
their  existence  in  every  age,  and  in  different  countries,  proves  that 
they  must  have  sprung  from  a  common  origin,  and  this  origin  one 
that  God  had  given,  for  the  proper  government  of  the  race.  They 
are  lawful,  moreover,  because  they  are  Scriptural.  They  are  proven 
to  be  Scriptural,  because  they  are  commanded  of  God.  Nowhere 
is  the  oath  forbidden  in  God's  Word,  but  frequently  it  is  enjoined. 
A  few  texts  will  suffice  to  prove  this  assertion.  "Thou  shalt  fear 
the  Lord  thy  God  and  serve  Him,  and  shalt  swear  by  His  name',' 
Deut.  vi.  13.  Li  Deut  x.  20,  the  same  injunction  is  repeated :  "  Thou 
shalt  fear  the  Lord  thy  God,  Him  shalt  thou  serve,  and  to  Him 
shalt  thou  cleave,  and  szvear  by  His  name."  And  when  we  take  in 
conjunction  with  these  passages,  the  commandment,  "Thou  shalt  not 
take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain,  for  the  Lord  will  not 
hold  him  guiltless  that  taketh  his  name  in  vain,"  what  other  inter- 
pretation can  be  given  to  them,  but  the  use  of  the  name  of  God  in 
the  oath,  sincerely  and  reverently?  In  Is.  Ixv.  16  we  read,  "That 
he  who  blesseth  himself  in  the  earth,  shall  bless  himself  in  the  God 
of  truth:  and  he  that  sweareth  in  the  earth,  shall  swear  by  the  God 


CIVIL    rOLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  6l  7 

of  truth."  And  in  Jcr.iv.  2,  "And  thou  shalt  swear,  the  Lord  hveth, 
in  truth,  in  judgment,  and  in  righteousness,  and  the  nations  shall 
bless  themselves  in  Him,  and  in  Him  shall  they  glory."  Upon  this 
passage  Scott  remarks,  "  The  constant  mention  of  swearing,  as  an  act 
and  part  of  true  religious  worship,  which  in  some  cases  is  expressly 
commanded,  constitutes  a  full  proof,  that  they  who  understand  cer- 
tain passages  in  the  New  Testament,  as  indiscriminately  prohibiting 
all  oaths,  lie  under  a  mistake  :  for  God  could  never  have  commanded 
that  which  is  evil  in  its  nature,  as  all  oaths,  by  such  an  interpreta- 
tion, are  supposed  to  be."  They  are  also  proven  to  be  Scriptural, 
by  the  Divine  example.  When  God  made  a  covenant  with  Abraham. 
He  said,  "By  myself  have  I  sworn,  saith  Jehovah,"  Gen.  xxii.  i6. 
This  transaction  is  often  referred  to  in  Scripture  as  the  oath  of  God. 
In  Heb.  vi.  13  and  17,  the  apostle  declares  that,  "When  God  made 
promise  to  Abraham,  because  he  could  swear  by  no  greater,  he 
sware  by  himself:  "  and  that  the  reason  for  his  so  doing  was,  that 
"  God,  willing  more  abundantly  to  show  unto  the  heirs  of  promise 
the  immutability  of  his  counsel,  confirmed  it  by  an  oath."  This 
quotation  has  been  objected  to  on  the  ground  "that  what  the 
Almighty  may  do  in  the  exercise  of  his  sovereign  authority,  is  not 
therefore  right  for  us.  It  would  not  follow  that,  because  He  may 
have  sworn  by  Himself,  we  may  also  swear  by  him."'''  In  other 
words,  the  objection  is,  that  the  Supreme  Lawgiver,  who  is  above  all 
law,  may  do  that  which  the  subject  of  law  may  not  do.  And  yet 
"Jesus  *  *  who  was  in  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  was  made  in 
the  likeness  of  ;//^;^  *  *  and  became  <?/;r^z'<;7// unto  death  " — has 
set  us  the  example  of  submission  to  the  oath  lawfully  administered. 
When  the  High  Priest  said,  "  I  aajitre  tJiee  by  the  living  God\\\^X.  thou 
tell  us  whether  thou  be  the  Christ  the  Son  of  God:  Jesus  saith  unto 
him,  Thou  hast  said."  This  was  an  affirmative  reply  to  an  oath,  to 
which  Jesus  made  no  objection.  Surely,  without  any  fiu-thcr  argu- 
ment, it  must  be  admitted  that  the  ordinance  of  the  oath  is  approved 
by  divine  example.  They  are  proven  to  be  Scriptural,  finally,  by 
what  is  recorded  of  individuals.  It  is  recorded  of  Abraham,  of 
Isaac,  of  Jacob,  of  Moses,  of  David  and  of  Nehemiah,  that  they  did 
not  scruple  either  to  take  an  oath  themselves  or  to  administer  the 
ordinance  to  others.  And  these  records  contain  not  a  word  of  cen- 
sure, as  to  the  use  of  the  oath  by  them,  but  rather  convey  the  im- 

*  Lewis'  Treatise  on  Oaths. 


i^ai 


6l8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

pression  that  it  met  with  the  Divine  approval.  So  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, the  Apostle  Paul  frequentl}^  uses  expressions  in  the  nature 
of  oaths.  "  God  is  my  witness:"  "  I  call  God  for  a  record  on  my 
soul."  For  these  and  other  reasons  we  believe  not  only  that  it  is 
right  to  take  an  oath  upon  just  occasions,  but  that  its  refusal  is  sin- 
ful, when  lawfully  called  to  the  duty.  The  objection  to  oaths 
founded  upon  Matt.  v.  34,  "  I  say  unto  you,  swear  not  at  all,"  and 
upon  James  v.  12,  "But  above  all  things,  my  brethren,  swear  not" 
etc.,  we  think  has  been  satisfactorily  answered  by  the  generally 
received  opinion,  that  these  words  relate  not  to  judicial  oaths,  but  to 
the  practice  of  vain,  wanton  and  unauthorized  swearing  in  common 
discourse. 

It  is  to  be  regretted,  however,  that  the  administration  of  oaths  has 
been  employed  to  such  an  unlimited  extent.  Religious  sanctions 
and  the  name  of  the  Deity  should  not  be  forced  into  all  the  details 
of  life,  and  mixed  up  with  its  most  trival  concerns.  The  temptation 
to  irreverence  by  such  a  course  is  very  great.  A  too  frequent  appli- 
cation of  strong  excitements  is  as  deadening  to  the  moral  as  it  is  to 
the  physical  sense.  Indifference  to  the  obligations  of  religion  will 
naturally  follow  from  an  ill-regulated  and  prodigal  appeal  to  them. 

On  Marriage. 
On  the  subject  of  marriage  the  Confessors  are  bold  and  out- 
spoken. In  Article  XXIII.,  of  Abuses  Corrected,  they  use  the  fol- 
lowing language :  "  Marriage  was  appointed  of  God  to  prevent  licen- 
tiousness; as  Paul  says  (i  Cor.  vii.  2),  'To  avoid  fornication  let 
every  man  have  his  own  wife.'  Again,  '  It  is  better  to  marry  than 
to  burn"  (Cor.  vii.  9,)  and  according  to  the  declaration  of  Christ  that 
not  all  men  can  receive  this  word  (Matt.  xix.  12).  In  this  passage 
Christ  himself,  who  well  knew  what  was  in  man,  declared  that  few 
persons  are  qualified  to  live  in  celibacy  ;  for  God  created  us  male  and 
female  (Gen.  i.  27).  And  experience  has  abundantly  proved  how 
vain  is  the  attempt  to  alter  the  nature  or  meliorate  the  character  of 
God's  creatures  by  mere  human  purposes  or  vows,  without  a 
peculiar  gift  or  grace  of  God.  It  is  notorious  that  the  effort  has 
been  prejudicial  to  purity  of  morals  ;  and  in  how  many  cases  it  has 
occasioned  distress  of  mind  and  the  most  terrific  apprehensions  of 
conscience,  is  known  by  the  confessions  of  numerous  individuals." 
And  again,  "  If  therefore  it  is  evident  from  the  divine  word  and 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  619 

command  that  matrimony  is  lawful  in  ministers  and  ecclesiastics, 
and  history  teaches  that  their  practice  formerly  was  conformed  to 
this  precept;  if  it  is  evident  that  the  vow  of  celibacy  has  been  pro- 
ductive of  the  most  scandalous  and  unchristian  conduct,  of  adultery, 
unheard-of  licentiousness,  and  other  abominable  crimes  prevalent 
among  the  clergy,  as  some  of  the  dignitaries  at  Rome  have  them- 
selves often  confessed  and  lamented;  it  is  a  lamentable  thing  that 
the  Christian  estate  of  matrimony  has  not  only  been  forbidden,  but 
in  some  places  speedy  punishment  been  presumptuously  inflicted, 
as  though  it  were  a  heinous  crime.  *  *  *  *  ^Y[q  apostle  Paul 
denominates  that  a  doctrine  of  devils  which  forbids  marriage.  And 
Christ  says,  "The  devil  is  a  murderer  from  the  beginning."  For 
that  may  well  be  regarded  as  a  doctrine  of  devils  which  forbids  mar- 
riage and  enforces  the  prohibition  by  the  shedding  of  blood.  In 
Article  XXVII.,  on  Monastic  Vows,  they  say:  "  In  the  first  place 
we  teach  that  all  who  do  not  feel  inclined  to  a  life  of  celibacy  have 
the  power  and  right  to  marry.  Their  vows  to  the  contrary  cannot 
annul  the  command  of  God:  'Nevertheless  to  avoid  fornication 
let  every  man  have  his  own  wife,  and  let  every  woman  have  her 
own  husband.'  To  this  course  we  are  urged  and  compelled  both 
by  the  divine  precepts  and  the  general  nature  of  man,  agreeably  to 
the  declaration  of  God  himself:  '  It  is  not  good  for  man  to  be  alone, 
I  will  make  an  help-meet  for  him.' "  And  again:  'But  the  com- 
mon people  are  led  into  many  injurious  opinions  by  the  false  com- 
mendation of  monastic  life.  When  they  hear  a  life  of  celibacy 
applauded  without  measure,  it  follows  that  their  conscience  is 
oppressed  in  their  married  state;  for  when  the  common  people  hear 
that  the  mendicants  alone  are  to  be  regarded  as  perfect,  they  can 
not  feel  assured  that  they  are  not  guilty  of  sin,  in  holding  worldly 
possessions  and  pursuing  a  worldly  calling.  *  *  And-  we  read 
of  many  examples  of  persons  who  have  forsaken  their  wives  and 
children,  and  also  the  duties  of  civil  government,  and  confined  them- 
selves in  monasteries.  They  regarded  this  as  fleeing  from  the  world 
and  seeking  such  a  life  as  is  more  pleasing  to  God  than  any  other. 
They  could  not  understand  that  it  is  our  duty  to  serve  God  accord- 
ing to  those  commands  which  he  has  given,  and  not  those  invented 
by  men.  But  that  is  certainly  a  good  and  perfect  state  of  life  which 
is  sanctioned  by  the  law  of  God,  whilst  that  is  a  dangerous  condition 
or  mode  of  life  which  is  unauthorized  by  the  divine  law."       These 


620  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

are  brave  and  true  words,  and  considering  the  circumstances  under 
which  they  were  spoken,  as  brave  and  true  words  as  ever  were  ut- 
tered. The  lawfuhiess  cannot  be  denied.  It  is  founded  in  reason, 
and  sanctioned  by  the  word  of  God.  Abohsh  this  relation  and  what 
would  be  the  result  ?  The  purposes  of  human  society  would  be  de- 
feated ;  virtue  would  be  disregarded,  and  man  would  live  under  the 
lawless  control  of  his  wild  and  wanton  passions.  The  sweet  influ- 
ences of  home  would  never  be  realized,  and  the  education  of  each 
successive  generation  under  the  eye  of  parental  love  and  watchful- 
ness would  be  a  thing  unknown.  Religion,  patriotism,  the  purity  of 
social  life  and  the  perfection  of  human  society,  all  have  their  roots 
in  the  marriage  institution.  Marriage  is  the  fundamental  source  and 
law  of  the  family,  and  out  of  the  family  comes  society,  and  out  of 
society  government,  and  out  of  government  law  and  order  and  love 
of  country  and  religion.  It  is  consequently  the  deepest  fountain  of 
power,  the  strongest  and  most  pervading  influence  in  society.  It  is 
the  richest  field  for  human  culture,  for  the  education  of  men  in  all  that 
is  best  and  noblest  for  this  world  and  the  world  to  come.  'Tis  true, 
that  there  have  been  unhappy  marriages  and  disordered  and  ill- 
regulated  families;  but  for  these  the  marriage  relationship  is  no  more 
to  be  blamed  than  religion  is  for  the  evils  that  have  been  perpetrated 
in  its  name.  Its  tendency  is  to  lift  up  and  not  to  cast  down,  to  ele- 
vate and  not  to  degrade,  to  bind  together  and  not  to  separate ;  and 
where  these  blessed  objects  are  not  attained,  it  is  not  the  fault  of 
marriage,  but  of  that  strange  perversity  in  our  natures  which  abuses 
the  best  of  gifts  and  turns  life  itself  into  death.  To  realize  the  true 
ideal  of  marriage  we  must  look  in  upon  a  home  wdiere  two  souls, 
needing  each  other  and  drawn  to  each  other,  enter  into  a  sacred 
covenant  to  share  together  the  duties  and  joys  and  cares  of  life. 
Diverse  4n  character  and  diverse  in  attributes,  they  compose  together 
the  perfect  nature,  and  live  together  the  perfect  life.  Acting  and 
reacting  upon  each  other,  they  develop  by  their  contrasts  and  differ- 
ences each  other's  being.  Under  the  influence  of  the  wife  the  rug- 
gedness  of  the  man  is  softened,  and  he  is  stimulated  to  deeds  of 
virtue  and  noble  daring;  under  the  influence  of  the  man,  the  charac- 
ter of  the  wife  is  strengthened  and  her  many  excellencies  developed. 
Each  is  a  stimulus  to  the  other — a  stimulus  to  noble  and  fruitful 
living,  such  as  constant  contact  cannot  choose  but  give.  "  Mutual 
forbearance,  mutual  comfort,  mutual  strength,  mutual  guidance,  mu- 


CIVIL    rOLITV    AND    GOVERNMENT.  62 1 

tual  trust;  common  principles,   common   duties,  common  burdens, 
common  aims,  common  hopes,  common  joys — here  are  the  materials 
of  life's    truest,   noblest    discipline ;  here   the   metal   of  character  is 
welded  and  molded  into  forms  of  finished  strength  and  beauty,  meet 
for  the  Master's  work  and  joy  in  the  great  assembly  and  church  of 
the  first-born  in  heaven."*     Then  can  we  conceive  of  a  finer  field  of 
usefulness  than  that  which  springs  from  the  fruit  and  outgrowth  of 
marriage  ?     Do  not  the  plastic  influences  of  home  outweigh  all  other 
influences  in  moulding  the  spirit  and  laying  the  foundations  of  char- 
acter ?     Shut  up  within  the  charmed  circle  of  this  quiet  life,  where 
love  should  sway  the  sceptre  and  kindness  rule  the  hours,  surely 
nothing  but  courage  and  patience  and  constancy  and  intelligence 
and  faith  and  hope  and  religion  are  needed  upon  the  part  of  parents 
to  make  home  the  grandest  and  sweetest  and  most  fruitful  scene  on 
the  footstool  of  Jehovah.     In  that  wonderful  picture  of  the  German 
nature  and  institutions  vvhich  Tacitus  painted  as  a  bitter  rebuke  to  the 
youth  of  degenerate  Rome,  the  central  point  on  which  the  whole  in- 
terest turns  is  the  fact  that  the  home  institution  was  prized  by  the  Ger- 
man— that  he  held  his  house  as  his  sanctuary,  literally  sacred  to  him, 
as  a  shrine  to  its  God.     It  is  perhaps  this  reverence  for  woman  and 
for  the  sanctity  of  homes,  which  characterized  their  life  even  in  its 
rudest  stages,  which  justifies  the  dictum  of  Hegel  that  "the  destiny 
of  the  German  people  was  to  be  the  bearers  of  the  Christian  princi- 
ples."    Marriage  then  is  undoubtedly  a  divine  institution,  founded 
not    only  in   reason,  but  expressly   sanctioned    by  the    Scriptures. 
"  From  the  beginning   of  creation,"  says  Jesus,  "  God    made  them 
male  and  female."     That  is,  there  was  that  in  the  constitution  which 
he  gave  them,  in  the  relation   they  sustained  to   each   other,  which 
made  it  proper  to   say  that   God  had  joined  them  together.     The 
Scriptures  brand  with   infamy  the  doctrine   that   forbids   to  marry. 
They  often  employ  the  connection  as   the  image  of  the  union   sub- 
sisting between  Christ  and  the  Church.     They  assure  us  that  mar- 
riage is  honorable  in  all,  and  the  bed  undefiled  ;  but  whoremongers 
and  adulterers  God  will  judge.      It  is  alleged,  however,  that  celibacy 
in  itself  is  holier  than  marriage.     This  is  the  principle  laid  down  by 
the  Romish  Church,  as  well  as  some  other  errorists.     Is  this  princi- 
ple a  correct  one  ?     We  deem  it  utterly  incapable  of  proof,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  no  just  comparison   can   be   made   between  the 

*I.  Baldwin  Brown. 


62  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

relative  merit  of  the  two  states  in  life.  Marriage  is  undoubtedly  the 
normal  state  of  man.  It  is  the  design  of  God  that  the  race  should  be 
continued,  and  this  can  only  be  done  through  the  marriage  relation. 
Celibacy  is  an  abnormal  condition,  seeing  it  would  lead  to  the  ex- 
tinction of  the  race,  and  thus  must  be  contrary  to  the  will  of  God. 
Can  then  this  abnormal  condition,  which  is  counteracting  the  designs 
of  an  infinitely  wise  God,  be  purer  than  the  normal  condition  which 
is  seeking  to  fulfill  his  will.  "The  barren  fig  tree,  then,"  says  an 
ancient  controversialist,  "was  purer  than  had  it  been  loaded  with 
fruits."  Besides,  the  advocates  of  celibacy  have  never  been  so  un- 
guarded as  to  say  that  it  saves  infallibly  and  of  itself;  no  more  have 
they  said  that  in  the  married  state  salvation  is  impossible.  Where- 
in then  can  a  comparison  be  instituted  between  them  in  point  of 
intrinsic  merit  ?  The  only  question  that  can  reasonably  be  started 
is,  "Which  contributes  most  to  salvation?"  Bungener,  in  his 
"  History  of  the  Council  of  Trent,"  says  in  substance:  "The  matter 
in  hand  is  not  to  know  which  of  the  two  states  is  the  most  holy^  but 
which  is  best  fitted  to  make  people  holy.  Now  in  these  terms  any 
general  and  systematic  answer  is  impossible.  Such  a  one  will  find 
salvation  in  celibacy,  without  any  marring  of  his  comfort  and  hap- 
piness; another  will  find  nothing  in  it  but  ennui,  disgust,  tempta- 
tions, evil  thoughts  of  every  kind.  One  will  grow  better  and  better 
in  it,  thanks  to  the  salutary  pressure  of  his  new  duties;  another  will 
see  in  it  only  a  yoke,  and  those  same  duties  will  have  proved  but 
the  occasions  of  new  faults.  Therefore,  we  repeat,  the  question  is 
one  of  facts,  not  of  principles.  Such  an  one  may  have  been  lost  in 
celibacy  who  might  have  been  saved  in  marriage.  It  is  impossible 
to  say,  a  priori,  which  of  the  states  is  the  better  of  the  two  in 
respect  of  its  effects,  as  to  prove  by  serious  reasons  the  intrinsic 
superiority  of  the  one  over  the  other." 

The  Right  of  Revolution. 

One  other  item  claims  our  consideration.  It  is  found  in  the  con- 
cluding part  of  this  Article.  The  Confessors  having  declared  that 
true  religion  does  not  consist,  as  some  had  taught,  in  the  abandon- 
ment of  all  civil  duties,  but  in  the  fear  of  God  and  in  faith;  because 
the  Gospel  teaches  the  necessity  of  ceaseless  righteousness  of  heart, 
whilst  it  does  not  abolish  the  duties  of  civil  domestic  life,  but 
specially  requires  them  to  be  observed  as  ordinances  of  God,  and 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  623 

performed  in  the  spirit  of  Christian  love,"  add  :  "  Hence  Christians 
ought  necessarily  to  yield  obedience  to  their  civ'il  officers  and  laws : 
unless  when  they  command  something  sinful ;  for  then  they  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  than  rnan."  As  Government  is  a  divine  insti- 
tution, the  Scriptures  in  their  general  tenor  as  well  as  in  many 
particular  passages  teach  a  due  obedience  to  every  properly  con- 
stituted authority,  which  society  may  require  for  the  protection 
of  its  own  interests.  No  society  whatever  can  exist,  without  a 
due  subordination  of  its  members,  and  subordination  implies  a 
supreme  authorit\',  which  in  one  country  exists  in  one  form,  in 
another  country  in  another.  Whoever  resists  this  supreme  author- 
ity is  an  enemy  to  good  order  and  the  welfare  of  society,  and,  as 
such,  is  guilty  of  a  crime  the  most  reprehensible  in  its  nature. 
But  this  doctrine  of  submission  to  legitimate  government  can- 
not consistently  with  common  sense  be  extended  to  all  the  abuses 
of  which  government  is  capable.  For  this  is  not  only  the  destruc- 
tion of  every  good,  but  the  certain  introduction  of  the  worst  evils 
that  can  be  conceived.  It  is  therefore  contradictory  to  St.  Paul's 
idea  of  a  magistrate,  who  calls  him  "the  minister  of  God  for  good," 
but  if  he  thus  becomes  the  minister  of  evil  he  is  no  longer  the  min- 
ister of  God,  and  may  with  safe  conscience  be  resisted  to  the  utmost. 
If  submission  to  all  abuses  may  be  defended  from  the  doctrine  of 
submission  to  government,  we  may  by  parity  of  reason  defend  even 
tlie  pagan  idolatry,  because  the  Scriptures  enjoin  religious  worship 
as  a  duty.  It  is  true  that  law,  in  the  proper  sen.se  of  the  word,  is 
entitled  to  absolute  obedience  ;  but  then  this  law  must  be  consistent 
with  the  ordinances  of  God  and  the  rights  of  man.  It  must  be  fun- 
damentally holy,  just  and  good.  In  the  institution  of  Providence 
law  itself  has  its  proper  boundaries.  God  has  given  no  human 
power  the  authority  to  make  any  law  which  deprives  his  creatures 
of  those  rights  and  privileges  which  he  has  conferred  upon  them. 
And  when  such  a  law  is  established  either  by  violence,  by  artifice,  or 
by  corruption,  it  has  in  reality  no  justifiable,  though  in  mere  form  it 
may  have  a  legal  obedience.  Opposition  to  it  is  founded  in  the  very 
in.stincts  of  our  nature,  and  is  supported  by  the  institutions  of  God. 
Hence,  in  the  language  of  the  framers  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, it  does  sometimes  "  in  the  course  of  human  events  become 
neces.sary  for  one  people  to  dissolve  the  political  bands  which  have 
connected  them  with  another,"   for  "  they  hold  these  truths  to  be 


624  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

self-evident :  That  all  men  are  created  equal,  that  they  are  endowed 
by  their  Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights,  that  among  these 
are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  That  to  secure  these 
rights  governments  are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.  That  whenever  any  form 
of  government  becomes  destructive  of  these  ends,  it  is  the  right  of 
the  people  to  alter  or  to  abolish  it  and  to  institute  a  new  govern- 
ment," etc.  This  resistance,  however,  is  to  be  understood  as  appli- 
cable only  to  laws  which  are  real  and  manifest  oppressions,  and  are 
not  reconcilable  with  the  laws  of  God  or  the  rights  of  man;  but  it 
is  not  meant  as  a  justification  for  those  wild  and  insurrectionary 
movements,  which,  under  pretence  of  grievances,  oppose  salutary 
laws,  and  from  motives  of  discontent  and  faction  are  the  disturbance 
and  disgrace  of  civilized  society.  Neither  does  the  right  of  resist- 
ance apply  to  every  unimportant  transgression  beyond  the  bounds 
of  legal  prerogative.  The  peace  of  society  is  not  to  be  disturbed  by 
such  causes.  Obedience  is  due  till  tyranny  begins  to  trample  upon 
the  dearest  rights  of  man  and  overturns  the  fundamental  principles 
of  government. 

In  reply  to  the  question,  "  May  a  legal  government  be  resisted  in 
unlawful  demands,  and  may  a  people  take  up  arms  against  a  whole 
government  previously  considered  lawful?"  Lieber,  in  his  Manual 
of  Political  Ethics,  says:  "When  this  question  has  been  discussed 
without  peculiar  reference  to  practical  cases  of  deep  interest  at  tlie 
time,  the  greater  number  of  jurists  and  philosophers  have  al- 
lowed that  there  are  cases  in  which  it  is  lawful  and  necessary  to  re- 
sist with  arms,  that  is,  to  resort  to  insurrection.  *  *  As  to  the 
principle  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever.  Everj^  unlawful  govern- 
ment ought  to  be  resisted,  and  permanently  changed,  if  it  perma- 
nently and  obstinately  insists  upon  a  course  injurious  to  the  people, 
and  if  the  evils  accompanying  the  change  are  not  greater  than  the 
blessings  to  be  obtained  by  the  change.  In  the  abstract  we  might 
easily  go  farther:  we  might  say.  Government  ought  to  be  resisted, 
whenever  it  acts  unlawfully.  But  the  unavoidable  difficulty  arises 
of  deciding  when  it  acts  unlawfully,  for  the  people  may  be  mistaken 
as  well  as  the  government.  Our  forefathers  enacted  in  many  cases 
that  if  the  ruler  distressed  the  people  against  the  law,  it  was  lawful 
to  resist  him.  *  *  The  government  is  an  organism  for  the  pur- 
pose of  obtaining  the  great  ends  of  the  state,  the  state  an  institution 


CIVIL    POLITY    AND    GOVERNMENT.  625 

to  secure  the  great  social  and  individual  ends  of  humanity,  and  if 
the  former  ceases  to  obtain  its  object  either  from  want  of  energy,  or 
because  it  endeavors  systematically  and  continuedly  to  undermine 
and  destroy  those  ends,  society  has  no  doubt  the  simple  right  of 
establishing  a  new  one,  even  where  there  is  no  particular  compact 
between  the  rulers  and  the  ruled.  The  government  is  no  longer  a 
lawful  one,  though  established  according  to  all  the  formalities  of  the 
law,  because  no  longer  anwrering  the  purpose  or  obtaining  the  ends 
and  objects  of  the  law.  Mankind  have  always  acted  upon  this  prin- 
ciple. Yet  so  necessary  is  a  government;  so  unrighteous  is  it  not 
to  deliberate  in  all  matters  relating  to  society  whether  we  may  not 
injure  others  more  than  we  assist  them;  so  doubtful,  calamitous, 
and  frequently  demoralizing  are  the  effects  of  insurrection  and  of 
civil  war;  so  easily  is  the  individual  deceived  respecting  his  own 
rights  and  the  probable  success  of  measures  which  may  appear  suit- 
able to  the  temperament  of  our  mind  at  the  time  ;  so  much  increased 
is  the  evil  of  tyranny  in  case  of  unsuccessful  attempt  at  resistance  ; 
and  so  frequently  (Joes  resistance,  even  though  successful  against 
the  government,  lead  to  tyranny  worse  than  the  previous  one,  to 
military  government;  and  so  often  does  it  open  an  arena  for  the  worst 
passions  and  shallow  mediocrity,  noisy,  forward,  and  unconcerned 
about  the  harm  it  produces;  that  he  who  resorts  to  force  against  the 
existing  government,  indeed,  commits  treason  against  society." 

Whatever  difficulties  are  connected  with  this  subject  of  resistance, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  our  dut}',  when  human  authority  seeks 
to  set  aside  the  plain  commands  of  God.  No  human  institution, 
though  ordained  of  God,  can  over-rule  the  higher  authority  under 
which  it  acts.  We  are  commanded  to  obey  God  rather  than  man, 
Acts  iv.  19;  V.  29.  Imperfection  clings  to  every  human  govern- 
ment. Their  rulers  are  not  divine,  even  though  government  is  a 
divine  institution.  Consequently  human  laws  cannot  be  placed  on 
a  level  with  God's  laws.  In  any  conflict  of  authority  between  them, 
the  lesser  must  yield  to  the  greater.  And  especially  is  this  true 
when  human  governments  improperly  undertake  to  regulate  the 
kingdom*  of  Christ,  thus  moving  out  of  their  own  pro\'ince  and 
entering  one  that  has  laws  and  methods  peculiar  to  itself  In  con- 
cluding this  discipline  we  cannot  but  express  our  admiration  at  the 
attitude  of  the  Confessors  on  Civil  Affairs  As  Dr.  Schmucker  in 
his    popular  Theology,  has  justly    remarked,  "it  is  certainly  com- 


62  6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

mendable,  that  living  under  a  government  so  defective,  the  Con- 
fessors should  have  uttered  not  a  word  inconsistent  with  the  purest 
principles  of  republicanism ;  nay,  that  they  even  asserted  to  the  face 
of  the  Emperor,  their  right  to  resist  such  laws  as  they  deemed  sin- 
ful." Their  views  were  broad  and  statesmanlike,  because  they  were 
founded  upon  the  word  of  God.  They  spoke  as  men  who  had  no 
favors  to  ask,  and  no  fears  to  cloud  their  views.  Honesty  of  pur- 
pose, sincerity  of  conviction,  and  solemn  responsibility,  breathe 
through  all  their  utterances.  Their  eye  being  single,  their  whole 
body  was  full  of  light.  Pure  in  heart  they  saw  God.  In  his  light, 
they  saw  light.  To  cherish  their  memory  is  a  sacred  duty;  to  walk 
in  their  footsteps,  a  noble  ambition;  and  to  be  guided  by  their  senti- 
ments is  to  be  saved  from  error,  and  grounded  in  the  truth  of  God. 


ARTICLE  XVII. 


CHRIST'S  RETURN  TO 
JUDGMENT. 

By  E.  J.  WOLF,  D.  D. 


ARTICLE  XVII.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  reads,  according 
to  the  Latin  Text: 

"  They  also  teach  that  at  the  consummation  of  the  world  Christ  will  appear 
for  judgment  and  raise  all  the  dead,  bestow  upon  the  pious  and  elect  eternal 
life  and  everlasting  joy,  but  condemn  wicked  men  and  devils  to  be  forever  tor- 
mented. 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists,  who  teach  that  the  punishment  of  damned 
men  and  devils  will  have  an  end.  They  condemn  also  others  who  are  now 
disseminating  the  Judaizing  notions  that  anterior  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
the  righteous  will  possess  the  government  of  the  world,  the  wicked  being  every- 
where destroyed.  (Ger.  Text:  "Certain  Jewish  notions  which  are  even  now 
mooted  that  *  *  the  holy  and  pious  shall  alone  possess  a  secular  kingdom 
and  shall  exterminate  all  the  ungodly.") 

The  XV.  Marburg  Articles,  wliich  constitute  the  original  draught 
of  which  the  Augustana  is  the  ultimate  development,  do  not  contain 
this  Article,  nor  any  allusion  to  the  Novissima.  It  is  found,  how- 
ever, in  the  second  outline  of  the  formulated  doctrine,  the  XVII 
Articles  of  Schwabach,  although  in  a  form  varying  somewhat  from 
that  here  given,  and  with  the  order  of  the  related  Articles  trans- 
posed. 

The  thirteenth  of  the  Schwabach  Articles  declares  "that  our  Lord 
Jesus  will  come  at  the  last  day  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  and 
to  deliver  his  believing  ones  from  all  evil  and  bring  them  into  ever- 

627 


62S  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

lasting  life.  The  unbelieving  and  ungodly  he  will  punish  and  with 
the  devils  condemn  them  forever  to  hell." 

This  Article  is  there  immediately  preceded  by  that  concerning 
The  Church:  "There  will  always  be  upon  earth  a  holy  Christian 
Church  until  the  end  of  the  world,  which  Church  is  no  other  than 
the  body  of  believers  in  Christ,"  etc.,  and  is  followed  by  the  Article 
concerning  Civil  Government:  "That  in  the  meanwhile,  until  the 
Lord  shall  come  to  judgment  and  abolish  all  power  and  dominion, 
we  are  to  honor  and  obey  all  civil  government  and  rule,  as  an  estate 
ordained  of  God,"  etc. 

The  import  of  this  sequence  as  given  by  Luther,  in  the  Schwa- 
bach  Articles,  is  evident  and  striking.  In  Art.  XII.  it  is  main- 
tained that  there  will  always  be  a  holy  Church  upon  the  earth,  a 
Church  that  must  endure  suffering  and  persecution  in  the  world; 
yet  in  view  of  the  fact  that  this  Church,  even  in  and  by  means  of  its 
struggles  and  afflictions,  is  steadily  advancing  toward  a  triumphant 
goal,  the  Parousia  of  her  Lord  and  the  completion  of  his  kingdom, 
it  devolves  upon  Christians  to  take  comfort,  and  in  the  meanwhile, 
until  this  glorious  deliverance  and  the  supersedure  of  all  worldly 
reign  and  authority  by  the  visible  reign  of  him  whose  right  it  is  to 
rule,  to  submit  themselves  loyally  and  reverently  to  the  worldly 
powers  under  which  they  are  placed.  It  is  not  their  province  as 
Christians  to  revolutionize  civil  governments.  They  are  ordained 
of  God  for  the  time  being.  Yet  it  does  behoove  them  at  all  times 
to  discriminate  between  the  rule  of  these  and  the  reign  of  Christ. 
The  internal  connection  in  the  Confession  is  therefore  virtually  the 
same,  even  in  the  reversed  order  of  the  Articles.*  From  the  pres- 
ent confusion,  the  deep  distress  and  the  fiery  tribulations  which  the 
Church  is  constantly  experiencing,  the  Confessors  lift  their  eyes  to 
the  future,  and  declare  their  conviction  that  her  ultimate  consumma- 
tion is  yet  to  be  achieved.  The  Church  does  not  despair.  Her 
conflicts  must  eventually  terminate  in  her  triumph,  and  not  in  her 
overthrow.  Her  feet,  bruised  and  bleeding  from  the  fangs  of  the 
serpent,  will  yet  crush  the  very  head  of  that  serpent,  and  the  king- 
doms that  have  so  long  humbled  and  oppressed  the  subjects  of  the 
true  King,  will  yet  themselves  become  the  empire  of  Immanuel. 
Inspired  and  sustained  by  this  unfaltering  hope,  the  Church  keeps 
up  the  contest.     She  is  persuaded  that  the  flaming  light  of  that  day 

*  Plitt's  Einleitung. 


Christ's  retukn  to  judgment.  629 

of  .days,  when  her  Lord  shall  come  in  power  and  great  glory,  will 
reveal  the  ruin  of  her  foes  and  her  own  enthronement  with  Christ. 
Now  her  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God.  Like  her  Lord,  she  is 
pierced,  dishonored,  crucified.  But  when  he  who  is  her  life  will  ap- 
pear, then  she  will  also  appear  with  him  in  glory,  conformed  to  him 
in  spirit,  and  partaker  of  his  overwhelming  triumph.*  The  day  of 
his  revelation  from  heaven  will  also  witness  the  manifestation  of  the 
sons  of  God.  f     This  she  knows,  and  this  is  what  she  confesses. 

The  surprising  brevity  of  the  Confession  is  well  illustrated  in  this 
Article.  The  whole  domain  of  Eschatology  is  in  its  thetical  state- 
ments couched  in  half  a  dozen  lines,  the  Confessors  aiming,  as  is 
well  known,  at  the  enumeration  of  only  such  points  as  were  deemed 
necessary  for  the  defence  of  their  position,  to  wit,  that  they  had 
adopted  nothing,  either  in  regard  to  doctrine  or  ceremonies,  that  is 
opposed  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  or  to  the  Christian  Church  Univer- 
sal.! 

The  true  scope  of  a  Confession  they  well  understood  to  be  the 
definition  and  defense  of  those  truths  which  are  essential  to  the  faith 
of  the  Church,  and  which  are  at  once  the  experience  and  the  expres- 
sion of  her  living  consciousness.  In  this  Article  they  knew  them- 
selves to  be  in  such  entire  accord  with  the  historic  Church  that  their 
language  is  little  more  than  a  literal  repetition  of  the  CEcumenical 
Creeds,  restricted  like  them  to  the  plainest  declarations  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

The  reformers  were  also  aware,  that  in  this  matter  there  was  entire 
harmony  between  them  and  their  antagonists  both  on  the  right  and 
on  the  left,  for  the  Zwinglians  were  perfectly  satisfied  with  this 
presentation  of  eschatological  doctrines  and  the  Romanists  offered 
no  objection  to  it  in  their  Confutation. 

"All  were  agreed  in  this,  that  the  history  of  the  Church,  therefore 
also  that  of  the  world,  will  terminate  with  the  coming  of  Christ  for 
the  final  judgment;  that,  moreover,  all  the  dead  will  appear  in  risen 
form,  and  that  the  judgment  will  effect  a  final  and  eternal  separation 
between  the  blessed  followers  of  Christ  and  his  condemned  foes."|| 

The  position  of  the  Confessors  in  this  Article  falls  under  three 
heads : 

*  Col.  hi.  4.  t  Rom.  viii.  19. 

J  Epilogus,  .Sym.  Biicher,  Miiller's  Edition,  p.  69. 
II  PliU's  Einleitung. 
41 


630  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

I.  What  they  Confess. 

II.  What  they  Condemn. 

III.  What  they  CommTt  to  Freedom  and  further  Elucida- 

TION. 

I.  What  they  Confess, 

Under  the  doctrines  confessed  we  have 

I.  The  Advent  of  the  Loi'd,  1)  napovaia.  This  is  the  first  event  to 
succeed  the  present  order  of  things,  the  condition  and  cause  of  the 
other  events  named  in  this  Article,  their  signal  as  well  as  their  centre. 

The  Lord  is  now  absent  from  his  beloved  bride.  The  Church 
presents  the  anomaly  of  a  kingdom  whose  Sovereign  has  for  the 
time  disappeared.  This  merely  spiritual  relationship  cannot,  in  the 
nature  of  the  case,  be  the  normal  or  the  final  state  of  his  kingdom. 
It  is  a  state  to  which  his  people  can  never  be  reconciled,  and  in  regard 
to  which  they  are  evermore  praying  that  it  may  speedily  terminate. 
He  who  has  personally  founded  the  kingdom,  who  has  given  for  it 
his  own  blood,  who  has  never  surrendered  his  immediate  headship 
over  it,  can  surely  not  have  purposed  to  remain  forever  removed 
from  it — as  far  as  the  heavens  are  above  the  earth.  A  glorious 
consummation  in  this  world  must  await  this  kingdom.  The  absence 
of  the  King  is  designedly  in  its  interests,  and  if  while  continuing  in 
the  closest  spiritual  relation  to  it  he  has  ascended  to  infinite  dignity 
and  power  only  the  better  to  promote  its  extension  and  assure  its 
triumph,  then  most  certainly  he  will  come  again  into  his  own  realm, 
with  the  display  of  his  real  majesty.  Surely  the  same  earth  -which 
witnessed  his  humiliation  for  the  sake  of  the  Church,  shall  also 
behold  his  glorification  at  the  head  of  the  Church  triumphant.  The 
world  which  he  redeemed  must  be  the  theatre  of  his  ultimate  vic- 
torious manifestation.  Both  Christology  and  Soteriology  demand 
the  return  of  the  Lord  in  glory  as  the  necessary  and  supreme  com- 
pletion of  his  office  and  the  proper  apocalypse  of  his  person. 

Such  a  hope,  therefore,  reason  itself  inevitably  awakens  and 
encourages.  In  the  words  of  Nitzsch:  "Speculation  has  so  little  to 
object  to  the  Christian  conception  of  the  world  catastrophe,  that,  if 
there  were  no  eschatological  doctrine,  it  must  supply  this  lack." 
"  History,  and  even  experience,  give  every  reason  to  doubt  whether 
without  such  personal  appearing  and  intervention  of  the  king  him- 
self in  the  course  of  things,  the  kingdom  of  God  could  indeed  ever 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  631 

arrive  at  the  complete  development  and  triumph  to  which  it  is 
designed  it  should  come.  It  is  with  this  doctrine  as  with  that  of 
the  Creation  and  Beginning  of  all  things, — in  its  ultimate  character 
equally  incomprehensible,  but  also  equally  indispensable."*  The 
personal  advent  of  the  Lord  is  thus  the  logical  close,  awriAELa,  of  all 
that  has  or  shall  have  preceded  it,  the  magnificent  dome  of  God's 
temple,  the  grand  finale  of  history.  This,  and  this  only,  will  give 
to  the  economy  of  redemption  an  issue  corresponding  with  its  eter- 
nal aim  and  purpose,  a  consummation  crowning  its  long  process. 

For  this  expectation  the  Church  has  the  fullest  warrant.  If  the 
language  of  Revelation  is  ever  explicit,  emphatic  and  reiterate,  it  is 
on  the  promise  of  his  coming.  If  reason  itself  suggests  this  sequel 
to  the  present  dispensation,  inspiration  guarantees  it  as  an  immuta- 
ble certainty. 

Even  before  the  disciples  distinctly  understood  the  purpose  of 
Christ's  first  coming,  they  received  one  lesson  after  another  upon  the 
second  Advent.  When  the  Master  in  his  tender  farewell  discourse 
communicates  to  them  the  staggering  news  of  his  withdrawal  from 
them,  he  at  the  same  time  consoles  their  breaking  hearts  with  the 
prospect  of  his  final  return.  His  going  away,  he  assures  them,  is 
but  the  condition  of  his  coming  again.  He  describes  to  them  great 
commotions  and  terrible  revolutions  and  judgments  that  are  to  over- 
take the  world,  more  especially  the  Jewish  nation,  and  through  these 
as  a  glass  points  them  to  the  still  more  awful  catastrophe  that  shall 
shake  the  powers  of  heaven  and  earth  and  at  the  same  time  signal- 
ize the  personal,  visible,  Parousia  of  the  Son  of  Man  in  the  clouds 
of  heaven,  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  attended  by  his  holy  messen- 
gers. He  represents  himself  as  a  nobleman  going  into  a  far  country 
to  receive  a  kingdom  and  to  return.  He  nerves  them  for  self-denial 
and  endurance  with  the  prospect  of  an  ample  recompense  when  he 
shall  come  to  render  to  everj'-  man  according  to  his  works. 

His  apostles  subsequently  take  up  the  theme.  They  thrill  their 
audiences  with  the  same  jo\-ful  truth.  In  the  \'ery  first  passage  of 
history  outside  of  the  Gospels  the  sacred  writer  reports  the  testi- 
mony of  the  angels  that  this  same  Jesus  shall  so  come  in  like  man- 
ner as  ye  have  seen  him  go  into  heaven. f  And  from  that  time  this 
strain  runs  through  all  the  apostolical  writings.  There  is  perhaps 
no  other  doctrine  on  which  their  testimony  is  so  united,  so  promi- 

*  Van  Oosterzee.  fActsi.  ii. 


6;^2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

nent  so  pronounced.*  It  forms  the  underlying  basis  of  all  the  ex- 
hortations and  consolations  of  the  New  Testament.  It  serves  as  the 
never- failing  solution  of  the  peculiar  tribulations  and  the  mysterious 
circumstances  which  Christians  were  called  upon  to  encounter,  and 
it  becomes  the  summit  of  all  their  aspirations  and  endeavors.  Nor 
can  it  be  without  supreme  significance  that  the  canon  which  ever 
resounds  with  this  hope  should  close  with  the  antiphonal  shouts, 
"Surely  I  come  quickly,  Amen.     Even  so  come,  Lord  Jesus." 

Not  all  the  numerous  passages  that  speak  of  Christ's  return  can 
indeed  be  understood  in  the  same  sense.  They  have  reference  now 
to  an  event  more  realistic,  now  to  a  fact  more  spiritual;  at  one  time 
they  point  to  an  occurrence  close  at  hand,  then  to  one  more  remote; 
here  to  his  constant  coming,  there  to  his  ultimate  coming  once  for 
all.  The  first  generation  of  Christians  were  not  to  taste  of  death 
until  they  would  see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  his  kingdom. f 
This  coming  is  certainly  not  to  be  confounded  with  that  eventual 
day  of  the  Lord  in  which  the  heavens  shall  pass  away,  and  the  earth 
and  the  works  that  are  therein  shall  be  burned  up.|  The  failure  to 
make  this  distinction  evidently  created  some  errors  and  confusion 
in  the  early  Church,  and  gave  rise  to  scoffing  taunts. 

Yet  whatever  difference  obtains  in  the  peculiar  import  of  the 
respective  utterances  on  the  Lord's  coming,  the  prospect  of  his  final 
advent  in  glory  never  disappears.  He  comes  in  manifold  ways  and 
at  sundry  times,  in  special  manifestations  both  of  his  saving  and  his 
judicial  office.  His  incarnation,  his  outpouring  of  the  Spirit,  the 
overthrow  of  the  Jewish  nation,  the  conversion  of  the  heathen,  and 
other  mighty  interpositions  that  have  advanced  the  progress  of  his 
kingdom  and  revealed  the  sway  of  his  sceptre  over  all  authorities 
in  an  ever-increasing  measure — all  these  are  instances  of  his  coming, 
shining  manifestations  of  his  presence  in  the  world;  yet  these  are 
but  the  symbols,  the  prophecies,  the  germs  of  a  still  greater  and 
brighter  advent,  the  appropriate  culmination  of  all  previous  comings. 
The  true  significance  of  the  latter,  in  fact,  lies  in  their  reference  to 
the  ultimate  Parousia,  the  "last,  all-deciding,  final  manifestation, 
which  constitutes  not  only  the  product,  but  also  the  end  of  the  pres- 
ent development." 

*Actsiii.  20;  I  John  ii.  28;  Rev.  i.  7  ;  2  Thess.  i.  10;  Heb.  ix.  28;  James 
V.  8  ;  Jude  14. 

t  Matt.  xvi.  28.  I  2  Peter  iii.  10. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  633 

Her  first  teachers  having  so  impHcitly  impressed  this  doctrine  on 
the  faith  of  the  Church,  it  passed  over  into  her  hfe,  and  has  ever 
been  one  of  the  strongest  and  most  marked  characteristics  of  her 
spirit.  The  more  healthy  and  vigorous  her  pulsations,  the  brighter 
burns  this  hope  and  the  more  steadily  is  she  on  the  watch,  "looking 
for  and  earnestly  desiring  the  coming  of  the  day  of  God."  Nothing 
is  dearer  to  her  than  "the  promise  of  his  coming."  Nothing  in  her 
best  life  is  she  more  intent  upon  than  to  discern  the  signs  of  his 
approach.  Nothing  in  the  deepest  perplexity  so  cheers  her  as  the 
hope  that  the  Lord  is  at  hand.  The  Israel  of  God  under  the  New 
Dispensation,  even  as  the  ancient  Israel,  are  distinguished  as  a  people 
of  desire,  a  people  of  the  future.  They  rejoice  not  that  they  have 
attained,  but  that  with  the  coming  of  the  Lord  they  will  attain.  It 
is  this  hope  that  kindles  and  sustauis  the  best  exercises  and  brings 
forth  the  best  fruits  of  the  soul,  and  "history  makes  abundantly 
manifest,  that  where  this  prospect  has  temporarily  receded  in  the 
Christian  consciousness,  the  spiritual  life  has  also  declined."* 

It  was  especially  while  the  Church  was  yet  in  the  glow  of  her  first 
love,  and  possessed  of  the  firm  faith  that  endured  the  ravages  and 
terrors  of  the  persecutions,  as  also  when  she  sustained  the  sublime 
struggle  of  the  Reformation,  that  this  hope  profound!)'  thrilled  and 
powerfully  supported  the  saints  of  the  Most  High. 

In  the  earliest  expression  of  her  faith  the  Church  affirmed  it  as 
the  completion  of  the  second  Article,  and  from  that  day  till  now  she 
is  never  done  with  the  confession  of  her  Lord  until  she  has  testified 
her  conviction  that  he  will  come  again  to  judge  the  quick  and  the 
dead.  It  has  ever  kindled  her  poetic  fire,  and  in  so  eminent  a  degree 
inspired  her  song,  that  no  great  truth  of  Christianity  has  struck 
sublimer  strains  from  the  sacred  lyre  than  the  vision  of  the  day  of 
the  Son  of  Man. 

So  too  in  the  ecclesiastical  year  which  the  Church  has  instituted 
as  the  perennial  expression  of  her  Creed,  she  has  set  apart  an  ex- 
tended portion  in  which  to  cherish  and  strengthen  her  advent  hopes 
and  prepare  herself  for  the  actual  and  ultimate  advent  season.  Even 
in  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  death,  in  the  midst  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion of  his  body  and  blood,  she  utters  this  truth  in  her  constant 
rehearsal  of  the  command  to  show  the  Lord's  death  until  he  come. 

Of  the  mode  of  the  Lord's  coming  we  can   in  the  nature  of  the 


*Van  Oosterzee. 


634  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

case  form  no  definite  conception.  All  eschatalogical  events  are,  in 
their  details,  necessarily  shrouded  and  veiled  from  our  present  knowl- 
edge. The  sphere  in  which  they  will  take  place  is  in  some  respects 
certainly  different  from  that  of  our  present  life,  giving  them  a  unique 
character.  Unlike  the  great  doctrines  of  Theology  and  Soteriology, 
experience  can  here  reflect  no  light  upon  what  is  left  dark  by  Reve- 
lation, and  the  statements  of  the  latter  are  such  that  with  our  pres- 
ent data  we  can  merely  spell  out  the  substantial  truth,  without  being 
able  to  interpret  the  concomitant  details. 

It  will  unmistakably  be  a  personal  coming.  All  the  references  to 
this  event  plainly  assert  or  imply  that  fact.  It  is  something  differ- 
ent from  his  ordinary  intervention  for  the  rescue  of  his  people  or  the 
judgment  of  his  foes,  those  ever-recurring  manifestations  of  his  grace 
and  power  upon  earth. 

From  these  instances  of  his  spiritual  presence  that  coming  is  dis- 
tinguished as  an  enKpaveia  tov  svpiov,  appearance  of  the  Lord,*  eKK^avela 
Ti/c  TTapovaiac,  manifestation  of  his  presence,  f  errKpavela  rr/c  (5o;//f,  appear- 
ance of  the  glory.  I  It  is  a  napovola  rov  Kvpiov^  an  arriv^al,  an  advent  of 
the  Lord,  a  presence  unlike  what  is  now  realized,  an  sKKpavha  t>/c 
irapovaiag^  the  appearing  of  his  presence,  by  which  will  be  destroyed 
the  wicked  one.  §  Now  he  is  taken  away  from  us,  we  walk  not  by 
sight  but  by  faith.  His  glory  is  hidden  from  view,  but  we  look  for 
an  'aiTOKaM'xptt:  'ir;(7ov  Xpiarov,  a  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.  ||  Now  the 
Church  in  her  humble  lot  is  partaker  of  Christ's  sufferings,  but  at 
the  revelation  of  his  glory  we  shall  also  rejoice  with  exceeding  joy.^ 
The  manifestation  of  God  in  the  flesh  has  indeed  already  taken  place, 
but  this  only  in  humiliation  and  as  the  prelude  of  the  complete  reve- 
lation which  the  Church  is  awaiting,  aTreKdexo/uevo;-  t?>  awoKd^^vxpiv  TOV 
Kvp'iov**  an  apocalypse  from  heaven  with  the  angels  of  his  power.ff 
Correlative  with  this  first  manifestation  in  lowliness  there  is  to  be  a 
second  actual  personal  advent  of  Jesus  Christ,  distinguished  by  ma- 
jesty, splendor,  salvation,  an  advent  which  is  explicitly  designated  as 
his  "  appearing  the  second  time,"  ek  Sevripov  *  *  'ocpOf/rrevai,  JJ  a  coming 
as  real,  personal  and  visible  as  the  first,  only  under  changed  condi- 
tions and  with  another  purpose,  partaking  more  of  the  character  of 

*  I  Tim.  vi.  14.  t2  Thess.  ii.  8.  t  Tit.  ii.  13. 

§  2  Thess.  ii.  8.  ||  i  Pet.  1.  7.  T[  i  Pet.  iv.  13. 

**  I  Cor.  i.  7.  tt  2  Tiiess.  i.  7  cf.  Col.  iii.  4  (pavepudij.        J+  Heb.  ix.  28. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  635 

his  ascension  than  of  his  incarnation.  "  For  this  same  Jesus  which 
is  taken  up  from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come  in  like  manner  as 
ye  have  seen  him  go  into  heaven."  He  shall  come  not  as  a  babe  in 
swaddling  clothes,  but  a  bright  and  glorious  form  ;  not  in  a  manger, 
but  in  the  clouds  of  heaven ;  not  among  the  brutes,  but  with  the 
holy  angels  and  celestial  powers  in  his  suite.  The  declarations  of 
Scripture  do  not  admit  of  any  other  interpretation  than  that  of  a 
perceptible,  real  coming  upon  the  earth.  Whatever  figures  may  be 
employed  to  envelop  the  event,  and  whatever  difficulty  there  may 
be  in  the  effort  to  combine  all  these  external  representations  into 
one  realistic  scene,  or  to  determine  what  passages  are  figurative  and 
what  literal,  they  indicate  a  resplendent  revelation  of  the  glorified 
divine-human  person  of  Jesus,  a  disclosure  of  his  personal  exaltation 
to  universal  power.  They. describe  his  unveiling  of  himself  to  all 
eyes,  *  his  coming  forth  out  of  the  invisible  and  super-cosmical  state 
into  that  of  visible,  cosmical  relations — as  the  lightning  flashes  forth 
from  the  darkness  in  which  it  lies  concealed  and  shines  all  over  the 
heavens,  so  shall  be  also  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man.  f 

The  consensus  of  the  older  Lutheran  dogmaticians  represents 
throughout  this  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures.  Verbally  repeat- 
ing the  inspired  statements,  they  look  for  an  "  adventum  visibilem, 
localum,  verum,  publicum,  gloriossisimum,  in  corpore  splendidissimo, 
ipsos  solis  radios  luce  sua  exuberante."| 

Later  theologians,  Reinhard,  Storr,  et.  aL,  while  regarding  the 
descriptions  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  pictorial  setting,  find  yet  in 
them  the  doctrine  that  Christ  will  come  visibly,  and  render  apparent 
to  all  the  reality  of  his  glorified  state. 

Objections  cannot  be  opposed  to  this  doctrine  other  than  such  as 
bear  equally  against  special  revelation,  creation,  divine  providence,  or 
the  incarnation.  The  inherent  possibility  of  the  theanthropic  glori- 
fied Redeemer  manifesting  himself  in  every  place  when  and  where 
he  pleases,  cannot  be  doubted  by  any  who  hold  the  Lutheran  Chris- 
tological  premises.  Its  explanation  is  another  matter — and  is  in 
fact  not  called  for,  belonging  as  it  does  to  the  sphere  of  the  mirac- 
ulous. 

Assured  as  is  this  prospect  of  the  Parousia,  the  time  of  its  realiza- 
tion has  not  been  revealed  to  man.     It  is   hidden  even   from  the 

*  Rev.  i.  7.  t  Matt.  xxiv.  27  ;  2  Thess.  i.  8,  J  See  especially  Gerhard. 


636  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

knowledge  of  the  angels  in  heaven,  yea  from  the  Son  himself,*  in 
his  state  of  humiliation.  The  Bride  is  not  to  know  the  specific  hour 
of  her  Lord's  return.  She  is  to  keep  herself  always  waiting,  expec- 
tant, ready.  This  is  her  best  and  her  worthiest  frame,  and  to  this 
state  of  mind  the  uncertainty  of  her  blessed  hour  very  materially 
contributes. 

While  language  was  often  employed  which  made  the  impression 
that  the  Parousia  would  take  place  very  soon,  the  possibility  of  delay 
M'as  also  clearly  indicated.f  The  uncertainty  was  strongly  empha- 
sized and  the  practical  caution  always  given  to  be  ready,  inasmuch 
as  it  would  unexpectedly  break  in  upon  the  world,  unlookedfor  like 
a  thief  in  the  nignt,  suddenly  as  the  flash  of  a  thunderbolt,  swiftly 
overtaking  God's  enemies  presuming  upon  peace  and  safety. 

The  very  passages  which  bring  out  tl^e  "suddenness  and  the  sur- 
prise which  will  characterize  the  advent,  aid  furthermore  in  estab- 
lishing the  conclusion  that  it  will  be  a  distinct  act,  an  act  complete 
in  itself,  happening  once  for  all  at  a  specific  point  of  time,  and  in 
no  sense  a  process  or  a  course  of  progressive  manifestation.  How 
long  the  day  of  his  coming  may  continue,  what  immense  ages  may  be 
embraced  in  that  eventful  day  into  which  all  other  days  and  periods 
are  flowing,  has  not  been  revealed,  but  the  Parousia  itself  will  be 
the  act  of  a  moment.      It  will  be  instantaneous. 

Although  all  efforts  to  compute  the  precise  date  of  the  Lord's  com- 
ing must  be  viewed  as  a  profane  endeavor  to  pry  into  those  secret 
things  which  belong  unto  God,  nevertheless  some  considerations 
respecting  the  signs  that  shall  usher  it  in,  are  not  to  be  lost  sight  of 

a.  The  Scriptures  very  plainly  intimate  that  the  event  will  be 
immediately  preceded  by  premonitory  portentous  phenomena — by 
a  period  of  distress  and  tribulation  surpassing  all  the  woes  our 
world  has  ever  experienced,!  the  powers  of  nature  suffering  great 
convulsions  and  mighty  changes,  men's  hearts  failing  them  for  fear.§ 

Thus,  while  the  wicked,  sitting  in  their  own  security,  blinded  with 
unbelief,  dreaming  of  peace,  will  be  surprised  with  sudden  destruc- 
tion, there  is  no  occasion  for  the  enlightened,  believing,  ever-watch- 
ful saints,  being  so  overtaken.  It  is  their  duty  as  well  as  their 
privilege  to  discern  the  signs  of  the  times,  and  at  the  appearance  of 
certain  signals  to  lift  up  their  heads,  assured  that  their  redemption 

*Mark  xiii,  32.  fMatt.  xxiv.  6,  48,  xxv.  ig  :  2  Thess.  ii.  2. 

J  Matt.  xxiv.  21.  2  Luke  xxi. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  6^,7 

is  near,  the  night  is  far  spent,  the  morning  dawns,  he  is  nigh  even 
at  the  door.* 

To  those  therefore  who  have  beHeved  the  prophets  and  whose 
hopeful  eyes  have  watched  the  sky,  their  Lord's  return  is  not  unex- 
pected as  it  is  to  those  who  have  scoffed  at  the  promise  of  his  com- 
ing and  imagined  that  all  things  still  continue  as  from  the  beginning 
of  the  creation.! 

b.  The  principle  of  historical  development  has  its  place  preemi- 
nently in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  events  of  the  world  run  their 
course  according  to  a  well-defined  plan,  advancing  through  succes- 
sive stages  and  unfoldings  to  a  destined  goal.  First  the  blade,  then 
the  ear,  then  the  full  corn,  is  the  process  with  which  the  Lord  him- 
self illustrates  the  development  of  his  reign. 

The  ages  anterior  to  the  incarnation  were  steadily  moving  and 
pointing  toward  the  fullness  of  time,  unfolding  more  and  more  the 
conception  of  this  "  great  mystery,"  and  getting  the  world  prepared 
for  its  appearance.  Thus  the  philosophy  of  history  demands  a  cer- 
tain process  of  extension  and  development  both  in  the  Church  and 
in  the  world,  before  the  fullness  of  time  shall  again  come  round. 
The  great  movements  or  history  are  not  hap-hazard  accidents,  but 
steps  and  stages  in  the  march  of  God's  plan,  removing  obstructions, 
uniting  the  nations,  preparing  the  way  of  the  Lord,  and  hastening 
the  vvished-for  day.  Until  these  have  run  their  course  and  reached 
their  teleological  consummation,  until  the  anti-Christian  powers  as 
well  as  the  Christian  Church  have  become  alike  ripe  for  the  reaper, 
the  end  of  the  present  order  is  not  to  be  looked  for.  Not  only 
must  the  Gospel  first  be  preached  in  all  the  world  as  a  witness  to 
all  nations,  not  only  must  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles  come  in,  and 
the  Jews  as  a  people  be  brought  to  embrace  salvation,  so  that  the 
Church  shall  represent  the  totality  of  the  nations  when  she  wel- 
comes her  Lord  to  gather  his  elect  out  of  all  lands,];  but  the  forces 
of  evil  must  beforehand  have  attained  their  ultimate  development- 
The  day  of  Christ  will  not  be  at  hand  until  the  man  of  sin  shall 
have  celebrated  his  desperate  triumph  in  the  great  Apostasy.  The 
revelation  of  the  son  of  perdition  will  precede  the  revelation  of  the 
Redeemer.§ 

*  Matt.  xxiv.  32,  33.  f  2  Peter  iii.  3,  4. 

X  Matt.  xxiv.  14 ;  Rom.  xi.  25,  26.  g  2  Thess.  ii.  2-6. 


638  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  seed  of  the  woman  and  the  seed  of  the  serpent  have  not 
only  all  through  history  developed  side  by  side  toward  their  respec- 
tive consummation,  but  the  conflict  between  them  has  been  steadily 
increasing  in  fierceness  and  obstinacy,  so  that  every  triumph  in  the 
kingdom  of  light  is  confronted  by  a  corresponding  energy  in  the 
realm  of  darkness. 

The  subtle  representatives  of  evil  have  never  been  surprised. 
And  when  in  the  course  of  the  zealous  diffusion  of  the  Gospel  and 
its  effectual  power  alike  over  Jews  and  Gentiles,  they  will  recognize 
the  imminence  of  the  Parousia.  their  uttermost  opposition  to  the 
Gospel  will  be  put  forth.  The  contest  thickens  as  the  end  ap- 
proaches. Its  all-dissolving  fires  send  forth  at  last,  like  a  furnace, 
streams  of  distress,  temptation  and  delusion  which  threaten  to  en- 
gulf the  very  elect.*     Such  are  the  precursors  of  the  Advent. 

It  is  the  generally  accepted  teaching  of  Scripture  that  the  ever- 
increasing  hostility  to  Christ  will  at  last  culminate  in  a  personal 
bearer.  As  if  to  forestall  the  personal  appearance  of  Christ  in  the 
glory  of  his  power,  all  the  anti-Christian  elements  will  consolidate 
and  embody  themselves  in  "  one  man  of  sin,"  the  actual  impersona- 
tion of  evil.  The  opposition  to  Christianity  will  be  incarnate,  con- 
crete, concentrated  in  a  personal  Anti-Chkist.  This  title  has  been 
applied  to  various  individuals  and  institutions  in  the  course  of  his- 
tory. The  Dogmaticians  used  the  term  (a)  generically  tor  all  her- 
etics, little  anti-Christs,  and  (b)  specifically  for  that  remarkable  ad- 
versary described  by  Paul,  who  by  way  of  distinction  is  called  the 
great  anti- Christ. f  This  view  was  generally  held  hy  the  mediaeval 
anti-hierarchical  sects,  and  from  them  passed  over  to  the  Reformers  J 
and  the  Dogmaticians,  some  of  whom,  however,  adopted  from  the 
Greek  Church  the  view  that  Mohammed  and  the  Turkish  power 
were  anti-Christ,  and  thus  held  to  a  two-fold  anti-Christ,  an  Eastern 
one  and  a  Western.  As  it  seems  clear  from  his  portraiture  by  Scrip- 
ture, that  anti-Christ  will  represent  not  exclusively  irreligious  or 
anti-religious  forces,  but,  as  the  name  indicates,  will  be  the  counter- 
part of  the  true   faith   and  the   true  Redeemer,  ||  through  manifold 

*  Matt.  xxiv.  9  ff.;  2  Thess.  ii.  3 ;  i  John.  ii.  18. 
-j-Schmid,  pp.  658  f. 

X  Apol.  Conf.  p.  200,  Art.  Smalc.  308,  336,  etc. 
II  2  Thess,  ii.  9;  Rev.  ii.  13. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  639 

false  miracles  imitating  and  personating  Christ,  and  as  the  long  con- 
tinued though  hidden  activity  of  anti-Christ  forbids  his  embodiment 
in  the  life  of  one  man,  it  is  altogether  probable  that  a  constituent  ele- 
ment of  the  final  anti-Christ  will  be  the  papal  imposture.  Its  inor- 
dinate pride,  its  immeasurable  presumption  by  which  it  arrogates  to 
itself  boundless  superiority  to  every  power  in  heaven  and  on  earth, 
is  one  of  the  distinctive  marks  of  anti-Christ.* 

Hengstenberg's  view  of  an  ideal  personality  is  a  solution  that  is 
totally  inadequate  to  the  inspired  representation,  and  it  contradicts 
the  united  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  who  reflected  the  doctrinal  con- 
sciousness of  the  churches  in  which  still  re-echoed  the  oral  utter- 
ances of  the  Apostles,  and  who,  with  one  accord,  regarded  anti- 
Christ  as  an  individual  person,  the  incarnation  and  concentration  of 
sin. 

Ideal  anti-Christian  forces  may  indeed,  from  time  to  time,  reveal 
themselves,  prevailing  unbelief  and  frightful  ungodliness  may  in  any 
period  serve  as  prefigurations  of  the  final  anti-Christ,  but  just  as  the 
union  of  all  soteriological  types  and  prophecies  in  one  person  con- 
stituted the  actual  and  living  Christ,  so  the  concentration  of  all  the 
direful  forms  of  wickedness  in  one  colossal  personality  answers  best 
to  the  scriptural  delineation  of  anti-Christ. 

In  identifying  such  individual  monsters  as  Caligula,  Nero,  Napo- 
leon, with  anti-Christ,  the  error  of  scholars  has  consisted  principally 
in  their  viewing  these  baneful  appearances  as  the  real  anti-Christ, 
rather  than  as  lurid,  typical  precursors  of  the  final  personality  in 
whom  the  God-opposing  principle  will  embody  itself  and  display  its 
superhuman  power. 

"Almost  all  great  movements  for  good  or  for  ill  have  been  gath- 
ered to  a  head  by  one  central  personal  agency.  There  seems  nothing 
improbable,  then,  judging  from  the  analogy  of  the  partial  manifesta- 
tions which  we  have  already  seen,  that  the  centralization  of  theanti- 
Christian  power  may  ultimately  take  place  in  the  person  of  some 
one  of  the  sons  of  men."t 

The  spirit  of  anti-Christ  has  been  all  along  at  work  in  these  hos- 
tile forms  and  gigantic  agencies  of  evil,  but  as  a  "mystery  of  in- 
iquity," a  power  not  clearly  revealed,  seeking  to  accomplish  in  secret, 

*  2  Thess.  ii.  5-9. 

t  Dean  Alford.  The  Greek  Testament.  Vol.  III.  Prolegomena  on  2  Thess.; 
cf.  also  Lange's  Commentary  on  the  same  Epistle. 


640  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

underground,  its  infernal  aims.  It  is  in  fact  hindered  from  the  full 
manifestation  of  its  character,  restrained  for  the  time  from  breaking 
out  in  personal  embodiment  and  exercising  its  deadliest  deceptions 
and  delusions,  by  the  kutexov,  by  the  providential  coercion  of  temporal 
polity,  the  conservative  forces  which  maintain  the  civil  and  social 
order  of  the  world.  This  continuous  conflict  between  the  aw/zo?  and 
the  KartxM  constitutes  the  soul  of  history,  and  in  consequence  of  it 
the  fierce  foe  of  redemption  is  held  in  check  until  redemption  itself 
shall  have  achieved  its  triumph  in  the  evangelization  of  all  nations 
and  the  conversion  of  the  ancient  chosen  race.  Then  the  dykes 
will  break  and  a  deluge  of  infidelity,  spiritual  seduction,  religious 
persecution,  political  anarchy  and  universal  dismay  will  overspread 
the  earth.* 

Thus  will  culminate  the  hostility  to  the  gospel.  But  its  culmina- 
tion is  the  signal  for  its  overthrow.  It  is  suffered  at  last  to  reveal  its 
true  inwardness,  its  supreme  malignity,  that  as  a  last  decisive  test  it 
shall  make  manifest  those  who  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth 
that  they  might  be  saved. f  The  crisis  will  therefore  be  brief  The 
momentous  calamities  inaugurated  by  anti-Christ  will  precipitate  the 
revelation  of  the  Lord  from  heaven.  Just  when  the  distress  of  the 
Church  has  reached  its  height,  and  its  enemies  have  grown  perfectly 
confident  of  victory,  then,  no  sooner,  no  later,  will  deliverance  dawn 
in  the  form  of  the  Son  of  man| — and  judgment  too,  for  he  will  con- 
sume his  enemies  by  the  breath  of  his  mouth  and  destroy  them  with 
the  brightness  of  his  coming. 

Whoever,  personally,  the  anti-Christ  may  be,  he  is  of  course  the 
soul  and  support  of  evil,  its  concrete  personal  principle.  His  de- 
struction is  accordingly  equivalent  to  the  overthrow  of  the  whole 
power  of  evil  in  the  world,  and  if  this  event  is  not  identical  with  the 
binding  of  Satan, §  it  is  certainly  to  be  viewed  as  coincident  with  it. 

2.  The  Jndgvicnt.  The  import  and  object  of  the  Parousia  are 
explicitly  declared.  "At  the  end  of  the  world  Christ  will  appear 
for  judgment."  The  completeness  of  his  triumph  signalized  by  his 
glorious  return  implies  the  all-decisive  judgment.  Visible  to  all 
flesh,  the  appearance  of  the  Lord  in  sublime  majesty  will  have  a  mo- 
mentous significance  alike  to  unbelievers  and  to  believers,  to  every 
disobedient  creature  as  well  as  to  the  sanctified.     It  will  make  a  full 


*  Luke  xxi.  25;  Matt.  xxiv.  8-13,  21.  f  2  Thess.  ii.  9-12. 

I  Matt.  xxiv.  30;  Luke  xxi.  27,  28.  g  Rev.  xx.  2;  2  Ttiess.  i.  7. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  641 

revelation  of  the  real  character  of  all  and  of  their  true  relation  to 
God,  and  determine  finally  and  irrevocably  their  respective  destiny. 

That  the  course  of  this  world  must  issue  in  a  final  retributiv'e 
judgment  is  a  postulate  of  the  universal  moral  sense.  It  is  demanded 
as  the  goal  of  man's  moral  development.  It  is  guaranteed  by  his 
faith  in  the  justice  of  God.  While  judgment  is  unmistakably  present 
in  the  world,  a  power  that  makes  for  righteousness,  sifting  and  sepa- 
rating the  good  from  the  evil  and  dispensing  its  awards  to  virtue 
and  to  vice;  while  history  itself  is  a  manifest  Nemesis,  a  progressive 
judicial  process;  yet  all  admit  the  incompleteness,  the  unsatisfying 
and  often  most  perplexing  character  of  the  retribution  apparent  in 
the  present  order  of  things.  There  seem  to  be  marvelous  inequali- 
ties, inexplicable  diffiulties.  The  course  of  judgment  strikes  human 
eyes  at  the  best  as  relative,  partial,  doubtful.  There  is  a  universal 
appeal  to  a  court  of  dernier  ressort,  a  definitive  absolute  decision,  so 
complete  in  its  character  and  so  clear  in  its  revelation  as  to  place 
both  the  process  and  the  awards  of  judgment  beyond  all  question. 

Standing  in  essential  connection  with  each  other,  we  can  not  fail 
to  notice  the  analogy  here  presented  between  the  judgment  and  the 
Parousia.  As  Christ  is  in  one  sense  ever  coming,  evincing  his  pres- 
ence with  his  kingdom,  so  judgment  is  ever  being  exercised  in  its 
searchings,  decisions,  and  retributions.  As  the  former  points  typi- 
cally to  a  final  act,  so  the  latter  also  is  but  the  prophecy  and  prepa- 
ration of  an  ultimate  consummation.  As  the  constant  invisible 
Parousia  of  Christ  is  to  eventuate  in  a  mighty  apocalypse  of  glory 
before  all  eyes,  so  the  latent  march  of  judgment  must  issue  in  an 
awful,  resplendent  revelation  of  its  character  before  the  universal 
assembly  of  creation. 

It  will  accordingly  be  a  marked  feature  of  the  judgment  to  bring 
to  light  all  that  in  the  moral  world  was  hidden,  to  clear  up  all  that 
was  dark,  to  make  an  inexorable  disclosure  of  the  secrets  of  men's 
hearts  and  the  true  character  and  worth  of  their  affections  and  their 
actions,  to  afford  an  unerring  and  public  discernment  between  him 
that  serveth  God  and  him  that  serveth  him  not.  The  judgment  which 
constitutes  the  climax  of  the  world's  development,  is  to  determine, 
in  the  light  of  the  great  white  throne,  the  true  inherent  character  of 
all  moral  phenomena  as  viewed  from  the  standard  of  divine  holiness. 
This  judicial  action  each,  so  far  as  it  affects  himself,  will  realize  as  he 
never  realized  God's  judgment  before,  while  at  the  same  time  all  will 


642  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

recognize  and  approve  the  decision  and  the  sentence  that  fall  respect- 
ively upon  others.  In  the  awful  glare  of  that  day  a  light  will  burst 
upon  the  conscience  such  as  never  shone  there  before,  and  at  the 
same  time  the  eternal  world  and  its  past  history  will  be  so  illumin- 
ated that  all  things  will  become  naked  and  open  before  all  eyes. 
The  full  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  in  the 
sight  of  men  and  of  angels  will  put  an  end  to  the  delusions  and 
illusions  by  which  the  depraved  have  blinded  themselves  and  others. 

On  this  subject,  too,  God  has  not  left  himself  without  ample  tes- 
timony in  his  word.  Far  back  before  the  flood,  but  a  few  genera- 
tions removed  from  Adam,  we  hear  from  the  mouth  of  Enoch  an 
explicit  prophecy  of  the  world's  closing  event.  This  day  of  the 
Lord  is  the  final  point  of  prophetic  contemplation.  All  through  the 
Old  Testament  and  in  the  New,  it  forms  the  background  of  every 
apostolic  proclamation,*  while  the  Lord's  own  prophetic  activity 
closed  with  a  description  of  the  last  judgment, f  which  for  sublimity 
and  power  finds  no  parallel. 

The  Scriptures  emphasize  the  import  of  the  fact  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  is  to  act  as  the  judge  of  the  world.  The  judgment  of 
mankind  is  committed  to  him  who  is  the  Head  of  the  race,  who 
endured  its  temptations  in  his  own  person,  who  by  his  own  blood 
achieved  redemption  for  all,  and  whose  peculiar  relation  to  God  as 
well  as  to  man  gives  him  unique  and  absolute  fitness  for  this  office.^ 

The  seals  of  the  book  of  judgment  are  opened  by  the  Lamb 
standing  in  the  midst  of  the  throne.  §  Yet  none  the  less  terrible  are 
its  revelations  and  its  decisions,  for  the  rulers  and  the  great  men, 
the  rich  and  the  mighty  as  well  as  every  bondman  and  every  free- 
man, shall  seek  to  hide  themselves  from  the  face  of  him  that  sitteth 
upon  the  throne,  and  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb.^ 

As  furthermore  all  judgment  is  determined  by  a  certain  standard 
so  the  proceedings  of  the  great  day  must  follow  an  acknowledged 
norm  of  judgment.  The  final  awards  must  be  determined  according 
to  the  light  which  men  had,  and  not  according  to  what  they  had 
not.  The  basis  of  judgment  will  accordingly  be  the  law  under 
which  the  different  divisions  of  mankind  respectively  lived. 

*  Acts  X.  42;  xvii.  31  ;  xxiv.  25.  f  Matt.  xxv.  31-46. 

X  Matt.  xxv.  31  ;  John  v.  22,  23,  27  ;  Acts  x.  42  ;  xvii.  31  ;  Rom.  xiv.  10;  2 
Tim.  iv,  I  ;  2  Cor.  v.  10. 

^  Rev.  V.  5,  6,  9.  IjRev.  vi.  15,  16. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  643 

To  large  portions  of  the  race  no  special  revelation  is  known  to 
have  been  given ;  yet  these  are  not  left  absolutely  without  law,  inas- 
much as  they  are  under  that  universal  law  written  on  men's  hearts 
of  which  conscience  is  the  exponent.  By  this  law,  therefore,  now 
inwardly  accusing  or  excusing  them,  they  will  ultimately  stand  or 
fall.*  The  Jewish  nation,  on  the  other  hand,  lived  under  that  law 
specifically  revealed  through  Moses,  and  on  this  basis  their  eternal 
destiny  will  be  decided. f  Others  have  enjoyed  the  effulgence  of 
the  Gospel,  clearly  revealing  the  scope  and  spirituality  of  God's  holy 
law,  and  by  this  light  they  will  be  judged. 

But  why  should  Jesus,  the  Mediator  of  the  Gospel,  have  supreme 
judicial  authority  over  those  to  whom,  without  fault  of  theirs,  his 
Gospel  never  came,  and  who  in  consequence  could  not  partake  of 
its  benefits?  His  peculiar  fitness  and  authority  to  act  as  judge 
over  all  mankind  rest  upon  grounds  substantially  identical  with 
those  that  warrant  his  appointment  to  judge  those  who  have  ac- 
cepted or  rejected  the  great  salvation.  The  Gospel  is  but  the  ex- 
pansion, exposition  and  fulfillment  of  the  law  which  was  mediated, 
through  Moses,  and  this  in  turn  has  its  germinal  expression  in  the 
conscience.  Christ  is  in  the  largest  sense  the  end  of  the  law,  its 
fullness,  its  concrete  embodiment.  All  law  has  its  fountain-head  in 
him.  The  beams  of  that  same  Logos  whose  perfect  and  personal 
brightness  is  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ,  were  less  distinctly  reflected 
in  those  mysterious  symbols  and  prefigurations  divinely  given  to 
the  Jewish  nation.  And  that  same  eternal  orb  shot  forth  his  scat- 
tered rays  over  the  heathen  world  as  the  loyoz  oTrepiiaTiKbg,  so  that  total 
darkness  has  never  enveloped  the  human  mind.  Radiations  from 
the  Sun  of  righteousness  have  fallen  upon  every  age  of  the  world 
and  upon  every  creature.  Christ  is  and  ever  has  been  the  true  light 
whose  rays  fall  upon  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world.  He 
has  from  the  beginning  sustained  a  peculiar  relation  to  humanity- 
His  incarnation  is  not  the  commencement  of  that  relation.  Not  sin, 
but  the  creation,  brought  it  about.  Sin  clouded  the  affinity  but  did 
not  sunder  the  bond.  The  world  was  made  through  him,  and  in 
him  it  consists,  and  humanity  especially  was  created  in  him  as  its 
ideal,  and  may  be  said  to  have  its  existence  and  its  goal  in  him. 
All  the  relations  of  God  to  the  creature  are  mediated  through  his 
eternal  Son. 

*  Rom.  ii.  12-16.  t  John  v.  45. 


644  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Thus  by  every  consideration  is  Jesus  Christ  made  the  judge  of 
quick  and  dead,  and  before  him  shall  be  assembled  all  nations, 
whether  they  knew  him  as  the  world's  Redeemer  or  not.  He  is  to 
all  the  medium  of  their  existence,  the  mediator  of  light  and  life. 
The  final  destiny  of  each  one  hangs  indeed  upon  his  faith,  upon  his 
relation  to  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ ;  but  as  the  faith  of  the  patri- 
archs differed  widely  from  the  faith  of  Paul  and  of  Luther,  so  there 
may  be  a  dim  and  vague  trust  in  the  divine  mercy,  a  certain 
measure  of  faith,  among  the  heathen  on  whom  the  fullness  of  light 
never  dawned.* 

Another  difficulty  connected  with  the  Scriptural  representation  of 
the  judgment  is  the  apparent  contradiction  between  the  doctrine  so 
explicitely  taught,  that  every  man  is  to  be  rewarded  according  to 
his  works,!  and  the  equally  emphatic  and  cardinal  gospel  principle 
that  we  are  not  saved  by  works,  but  exclusively  by  grace  through 
faith.     Eternal  life  is  a  gift  of  God,  not  a  merited  reward. 

This  difficulty  vanishes  the  moment  we  consider  the  essential  re- 
lation between  faith  and  works.  Faith  is  the  soul's  normal  attitude 
toward  God,  good  works  the  manifestation  of  it.  Faith  is  the  in- 
ward side,  works  the  outward  form,  the  substantial  expression  and 
proof  of  faith.  Faith  is  itself  a  living  force.  It  is  creative,  dynamic, 
productive,  and  is  in  its  essential  core  of  an  ethical  character,  so 
that  in  its  operation  it  cannot  do  otherwise  than  bring  forth  fruits  of 
love  and  holiness.  It  is  faith,  therefore,  that  determines  the  moral 
quality  of  actions,  that  forms  and  transforms  the  character  in  which 
the  good  works  are  embodied  and  reflected.  The  just  lives  by  his 
faith.  Faith  itself  is  therefore  reckoned  as  righteousness, |  while  un- 
belief, the  want  of  faith,  is  the  tap-root  of  all  sin.§  Whatsoever  is 
not  of  faith  is  sin.  Faith  and  good  works  thus  form  an  inseparable 
union,  while  distrust  of  God  and  evil  works  are  one  in  kind  and 
character.  To  be  judged  according  to  one's  works  does  not  exclude 
the  principle  of  faith,  but  reveals  and  demonstrates  its  existence  or 
its  absence,  and  thus  implies  the  estimation  of  all  actions  by  the  in- 

*  Matt.  X.  41  ff.;  XXV.  36  ff. 

t  Matt.  xvi.  27  ;  Luke  xii.  47,  48;  Rom.  ii.  6;  2  Cor.  v.  10;  Eph.  vi.  8;  Rev. 
XX.  12;  xxii.  12. 

J  Gen.  XV.  6;  Gal.  ill.  6;  Rom.  ill.  20;  iv.  16;  Eph.  ii.  8,  9 ;  2  Tim.  i.  9;  Tit. 
iii.  5. 

I  Rom.  xiv.  23. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  645 

herent  force  from  which  they  sprang.  It  is  even  an  Old  Testament 
maxim  in  regard  to  works,  that  while  man  looketh  on  the  outward 
appearance,  God  fixes  his  eye  upon  the  heart.  He  searcheth  the 
reins,  in  order  that  he  may  give  every  one  according  to  his  works.* 
Works,  then,  exhibit  the  total  result  of  the  exercise  of  faith.  And 
the  judgment  of  Omniscience  will  make  manifest  its  deeds  that  they 
are  wrought  in  God.  Thus  even  the  reception  accorded  to  Christ's 
disciplesf  will  be  found  to  have  served  as  a  test  and  proof  of  men's 
real  attitude  toward  Christ  himself,  and  towards  righteousness — a 
doctrine  which  interprets  and  illustrates  the  judgment  scene  de- 
scribed in  Matt.  xxv.  3 1-46. 

The  absolute  universality  of  the  judgment  presents  also  some 
problems.  Our  Lord,  himself  the  judge,  declares  on  the  one  hand 
"He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  is  not  judged,"  "  cometh  not  into 
judgment,"  has  "passed  out  of  death  into  life."|  And  likewise,  on 
the  other  hand,  "  He  that  believeth  not,  has  been  judged  already, 
because  he  hath  not  believed."  And  yet  it  is  announced  in  unmis- 
takable terms  that  we  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of 
Christ.  Let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  a  characteristic  feature  of  the 
last  judgment  will  be  its  public  exposure  of  every  man's  moral  and 
spiritual  condition.  It  will  be  the  apocalypse  and  visible  consum- 
mation of  the  judicial  activity  which  the  mediatorial  Son  of  God  is 
exercising  throughout  all  history.  Men  are  not  summoned  before 
the  omniscient  judge  that  he  may  investigate  their  case  and  ascer- 
tain their  state  of  reconciliation  or  fixed  enmity,  their  righteous  per- 
fection or  their  damning  guilt,  nor  are  they  sunmioncd  before  the 
supreme  bar  that  they  may  learn  for"  themselves  their  true  state, 
hear  their  sentence  and  discover  their  eternal  destiny.  Each  one  in 
the  secret  of  his  own  soul  is  beforehand  conscious  of  the  moral  im- 
port of  the  judgment  in  his  own  case.  So  far  as  the  dead  are  con- 
cerned, each  one  secretly  and  with  certainty  knows  in  advance  of  the 
Parousia,  what  sentence  the  judge  will  pronounce  upon  him.  But 
the  judgment  will  consist  in  a  public  "Universal  Exposition"  of 
every  man's  recoi^d  and  realit}\  "  Precisely  this  is  the  essence,  and 
at  the  same  time  the  terrible  significance  of  the  last  judgment,  that 
it  is  the  maiiifc station  of  that  which  has  been  forages  concealed,  and 
yet  could  not  fail  ultimately  to  become  manifest."§ 

*  Rev,  ii.  23.  f  Matt.  x.  40-42. 

\  John  ill.  18  ;  V.  24.  \  Van  Oosterzee. 

42 


646  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  books  will  be  opened  to  the  gaze  of  the  universe,  the  secrets 
of  men*  laid  bare.  What  was  long  before  unalterably  decided  in 
the  case  of  each  individual,  and  the  grounds  of  that  unalterable 
decision,  will  be  brought  into  public  view  and  eternally  confirmed 
before  the  eyes  of  heaven  and  earth.  The  judgment  has  preemi- 
nently a  cosmical  significance.  Hence  by  the  dogmaticians  it  is 
called  judicium  manifestum,  universale,  in  distinction  from  the  judicio 
particulari  et  occulto  quod  fit  in  morte,  &c.  It  is  the  judicium 
extremum,  the  most  perfect  and  final  revelation  at  once  both  of 
divine  saving  grace  and  of  divine  judicial  righteousness. 

The  day  of  judgment  becomes  thus  the  counterpart  and  comple- 
ment of  the  day  of  salvation;  the  final  coming  of  the  Lord  is  the  cul- 
mination of  his  first  coming.  When  he  appeared  in  the  flesh, 
although  invested  with  all  authority  to  judge,  he  did  not  appear  for 
judgment,  but  for  salvation. f  The  judicial  office  was  held  in 
reserve,  and  although  salvation  and  judgment  proceed  all  through 
history  side  by  side,  as  is  evinced  by  the  flood,  by  the  destruction 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  by  the  overthrow  of  the  Jews,  and 
although  in  the  Old  Testament  prophecies  and  even  in  John  the 
Baptist,  both  the  salvation  and  the  judgment  to  be  executed  by  the 
Lord  appear  through  prophetic  perspective  as  a  simultaneous  occur- 
rence, and  as  the  result  of  one  and  the  same  Parousia,  the  successive 
stages  in  the  fulfillment  not  being  recognized,  yet  it  is  manifest  that 
in  his  present  Mediatorial  office  every  act  of  the  Lord  is  primarily 
an  act  of  grace  and  a  work  of  salvation.  The  judicial  agency  is 
however,  discernible  in  the  background,  so  that  what  is  redemption 
to  some  is  judgment  to  others.^  The  second  coming  will  witness 
the  reversal  of  this  order.  "At  the  end  of  the  world  Christ  will 
appear  for  judgment."  He  shall  come  without  sin,§  without  any 
sin-atoning  mediation  for  a  doomed  world.  Then,  after  his  salva- 
tion shall  have  been  everywhere  preached,  only  to  be  rejected  and 
spurned  by  his  foes,  God  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness  by 
this  same  Jesus  who  was  exalted  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour. 
But  this  very  judgment  will  be  the  signal  for  deliverance  to  the 
afflicted  and  waiting  bride.  To  them  that  look  for  him  he  will 
appear  unto  salvation.     His  advent  is  the  realization  of  their  blessed 

*  Rom  ii.  19.  t  John  ill.  17,  xii :  47  ;   Heb.  ix.  28  ;  John  v.  22,  27. 

J  John  ix.  39;  2  Cor.  ii.  15,  16  ;  2  Peter  ii.  7,  8. 
^Heb.  ix.  28. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  647 

hope — the-  glorious  appearing  of  the  great  God  and  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ.* 

3.  The  Resurrection.  "  He  will  raise  all  the  dead."  Inasmuch  as 
the  judgment  is  universal  and  the  judge  is  always  designated  as  He 
that  will  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  it  must  be  preceded 
by  the  awakening  and  bringing  forth  of  all  that  have  fallen  asleep. 
They  cannot  appear  before  the  bar  of  judgment  to  hear  their  sen- 
tence, until  they  have  been  summoned  from  their  intermediate  abodes 
and  they  stand  again  {avaaTaaio)  soul  united  with  body,  in  the  organic 
and  normal  condition  in  which  they  lived  upon  earth.  The  award 
which  is  to  be  determined  by  the  deeds  in  the  body  will  not  be  made 
in  the  absence  of  that  body,  but  with  that  body  joined  to  its  proper 
soul,  restored  to  a  state  corresponding  with  its  new  sphere,  and  thus 
made  capable  of  participating  in  the  reward  consequent  upon  its 
deeds.  The  first  result,  therefore,  of  the  Parousia  will  be  the  raising 
of  the  dead. 

This  truth  is  derived  purely  and  par  excellence  from  revelation. 
It  forms  one  of  its  distinctive  doctrines,  and  presents  to  the  under- 
standing inscrutable  mysteries  and  insoluble  difficulties.  "  Can 
these  bones  live?"  is  a  question  which  confounds  reason.  There  is 
nowhere  in  nature  any  intimation  of  so  astounding  a  fact,  nothing 
which  to  man's  natural  vision  presages  the  rising  again  to  life  of  that 
which  has  actually  been  dissolved  in  death.  Philosophy  has  con- 
ceived the  soul's  immortality,  but  is  so  far  from  discovering  the  body's 
restoration  that  this  idea  has  ever  provoked  its  ridicule.f  It  is  a 
rock  of  offence  to  the  natural  man,  who  views  all  things  from  the 
standpoint  of  natural  experience  and  sensuous  materialism.  The 
analogies  which  have  been  cited  as  illustrations,  the  phoenix,  the 
reanimation  of  the  earth  in  spring,  the  outgrowth  of  life  from  the 
dying  seed,  etc.,  all  fail  to  establish  the  hope  that  the  dead  bodies 
which  have  been  merged  into  other  organic  forms  can  ever  have  an 
actual  resuscitation.  The  death  of  winter  is  only  a  burial  of  life,  a 
general  hibernation.  The  seed  sown  does  not  really  die.  Its 
innermost  essence  springs  into  life.  The  process  which  seems 
like  a  disappearance  in  death  is  in  fact  a  development  of  life. 
If  the  seed  once  dies,  it  can  never  reappear  in  any  form.  The 
grain  of  wheat |  may  illustrate  the  mode,  it  can  never  demonstrate 


*Tit.  ii.  13  ;  Luke  xxi.  28.  f  Acts  xvii.  32.  +  i  Cor.  xv.  35  ff. 


648  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  fact  of  the  resurrection.  That  must  be  received  exclusively 
by  faith. 

It  lies  beyond  the  data  of  sense  and  reason.  Man  cannot  solve 
the  miraculous.  The  awakening  of  the  body  from  death  is  the  effect 
of  a  divine  fiat  resounding  through  the  silent  chambers  of  death. 
It  is  a  creation — not  ex  iiiJiilo,  but  a  new  creating  out  of  the  ruins  of 
the  old,  a  regathering  by  God  of  the  elementary  substance  that  had 
undergone  dissolution,  a  reforming  of  the  corporeal  structure  which 
distinguishes  man,  and  a  reuniting  of  this  restored  body  to  its  soul 
as  its  proper  organism,  a  creation  neither  less  nor  more  marvelous 
than  the  act  of  the  sixth  creative  day,  than  the  regeneration  of  the 
soul  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins,  than  the  continuous  formation  of 
ordinary  earthly  human  bodies. 

As  little  however  as  reason  is  able  to  discover  a  future  resurrection, 
so  little  is  it  capable  of  denying  it.  "  Why  should  it  be  thought  a 
thing  incredible  that  God  should  raise  the  dead?"  And  further- 
more, while  it  cannot  of  itself  bring  forth  the  doctrine,  yet  by  its 
postulate  of  a  retributive  final  judgment,  it  conveys  us  beyond  the 
sphere  of  ordinary  occurrences  and  natural  phenomena,  and  thereby 
at  least  prepares  the  way  for  accepting  the  resurrection  of  the  body 
and  its  reunion  with  the  soul. 

Resting  on  this  truth  of  reason  and  upon  the  anthropological 
premises  of  the  Scriptures,  the  bodily  rehabiliment  of  departed  souls 
presents  no  insurmountable  difficulties.  It  becomes,  thus,  not  only 
an  admissible  theory  but  an  inevitable  conclusion,  an  inner  necessity. 
Man  according  to  Scripture  is  the  unity  of  soul  and  body.  Cor- 
poreity is  a  constituent  element  of  humanity.  Unlike  the  angels 
above  him  which  are  purely  spiritual  beings,  and  unlike  the  irrational 
species  below  him  which  have  a  purely  physical  organism,  man  comes 
into  existence  a  union  of  the  spiritual  and  the  physical.  He  bears 
the  image  of  God  as  a  pneumatic  and  corporeal  being.  His  destiny, 
his  development  to  a  higher  stage,  must  take  place  in  the  sphere  of 
a  two-fold  organism,  the  original  psychical  body  be  so  penetrated 
and  transformed  by  the  spirit  as  to  be  raised  to  a  pneumatic  body. 

Sin  has  disturbed  his  development,  affecting  both  soul  and  body 
and  their  proper  relation  to  one  another.  But  what  sin  has  deranged, 
fi-race  is  to  restore.  As  man  fell  a  complex  being,  so  is  he  redeemed 
not  in  a  part  of  his  nature  but  in  the  entirety  of  his  original  consti- 
tution, embracing  the  potencies  both  of  spirituality  and  corporeity. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  649 

As  he  died  in  Adam,  so  shall  he  be  made  alive  in  Christ.*  Human- 
ity was  ordained  "to  span  the  chasm  between  the  higher  world  of 
pure  spirit  and  the  lower  world  of  pure  matter,"  the  two  constituents 
of  man's  nature  linking  him  with  both;  and  this  goal  he  can  reach 
not  by  the  unclothing  of  the  soul,  but  by  the  restoration  of  the  ori- 
ginal relation  of  soul  and  body,  by  the  renewal  and  perfection  of  his 
body  with  his  soul,  by  the  reclamation  of  its  prey  from  the  hands  of 
death  and  the  abolition  of  death  itself  and  all  its  consequences,  and 
finally  by  the  transformation  of  the  corporeal  element  into  a  higher 
and  spiritual  state.  The  soul  having  itself  been  regenerated  and 
replaced  into  its  true  position  of  dominion  over  the  body,  the  spirit- 
ual life  having  permeated  the  entire  personality  and  through  it  also 
sanctified  the  bodily  nature,  a  final  glorification  of  the  body,  a  resur- 
rection unto  life,  follows  inevitably.  While  severed  from  a  bodily 
organism  the  soul  cannot  be  regarded  in  a  perfect  state.  A  disem- 
bodied spirit  hovering  through  space  cannot  be  the  definitive  .stage 
of  human  development.  Perfect  blessedness  nmst  be  realized  not 
by  a  fragment  of  man,  but  by  the  entire  man  as  primordially  created, 
raised  into  the  glorified  state. 

The  explicit  revelation  of  this  doctrine  in  Holy  Scripture  is  incon- 
testable. It  is  catalogued  by  the  apostle  with  its  primary,  funda- 
mental doctrines. t  Its  denial  is  pronounced  inconsistent  with  belief 
in  the  Bible,  and  subversive  of  salvation. |  The  Church  has  through 
all  her  ages  boldly  and  unanimously  confessed  it  as  an  essential 
article  of  her  faith,  and  has  in  fact  placed  it  in  most  intimate  con- 
nection with  the  sanctification  and  consolation  §  of  believers. 

Clear  traces  of  the  doctrine  are  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  Its 
roots  may  be  recognized  in  Gen.  iii.  15.  It  was  the  possession  of  this 
hope  that  enabled  Abraham  to  surrender  unto  death  the  son  of 
promise. II  It  looms  forth  in  the  peculiar  exit  of  Enoch  and  Elijah 
from  the  world.  It  is  sung  of  in  the  Psalms.^  It  is  taught  with 
especial  distinctness  by  the  later  prophets,  and  although  with  some 
the  idea  may  be  figuratively  employed,  their  very  choice  of  such  a 
figure  proves  their  familiarity  with  the   doctrine.**     "The  certain 

*  I  Cor.  XV.  22.  t  Heb.  vi.  2.  X  i  Cor.  xv.  13,  13,  14. 

§1  Cor.  vi.  14;  I  Thess.  iv.  14.  ||  Heb.  xi.  19. 

If  Ps.  xvi.  9-1 1  ;  xvii.  15;  Ixxiii.  23-26. 

** Job  xix.  25-27;  Isa.  xxvi.  19,  Ixvi.  24  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  1-14;  Dan.  xii.  1-3; 
Hos.  xiii.  14. 


650  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

knowledge  of  this  future  event  is  presupposed,  and  a  hope  contain- 
ing another  truth  is  clothed  in  a  figure  derived  from  that.  There  is 
in  fact  no  period  to  be  found  where  faith  can  be  conceived  of  without 
this  hope,  and  no  point  after  the  first  promise  where  it  could  for  the 
first  time  have  arisen."  * 

An  irrefutable  proof  of  its  being  known  to  the  Jews,  especially  of 
the  later  era,  is  the  fact  that  in  the  time  of  Jesus  it  was  the  current 
popular  faith  of  the  orthodox.  Those  who  opposed  the  doctrine 
were  confessedly  unbelievers  and  materialists.f  and  when  they  con- 
front our  Lord  with  their  vaunted  difficulties  on  the  subject  he 
charges  them  with  ignoring  the  Scriptures.^  Hostile  and  bitter  as 
were  the  Pharisees  against  Christ  and  his  apostles,  on  this  point  they 
viewed  them  with  great  favor,  as  teaching  in  consonance  with  their 
own  tenets  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.§ 

The  clear,  direct  utterances  of  the  Lord  on  this  subject  are  familiar 
to  all. II  With  his  apostles  it  was  a  central  truth  in  their  epistles,  and 
an  ever  prominent  and  favorite  theme  in  their  discourses.  One  of 
the  grandest  and  most  extended  arguments  of  the  whole  New  Tes- 
tament is  devoted  to  the  unfolding  and  enforcement  of  this  doctrine 
over  against  the  Corinthian  skeptics.^ 

In  addition  to  the  explicit  promises  of  the  Scriptures  which  estab- 
lish beyond  question  the  future  reanimation  of  the  body,  it  has  an- 
other immovable  support  in  the  historic  fact  of  our  Lord's  resurrec- 
tion. In  all  things  our  example,  the  prototype  and  representative  of 
the  race,  his  resurrection  foreshadows  the  final  issue  of  death  and 
life  to  mankind.  It  is  the  assurance  and  the  pledge  of  our  resur- 
rection. 

Ideally  this  truth  has  been  already  experienced.  Believers  are 
represented  as  having  died  with  Christ  and  as  being  risen  with 
him.**  In  the  mystical  union,  every  act  of  the  Head  is  the  act  of 
the  members.     But  a  more  complete  realization  of  it  will  take  place 

*  Von  Hoffman,  Schriftbeweis. 
t  Acts  xxiii.  8. 

J  Matt,  xxii.  29;  John  xx.9;  Acts  ii. '25-31, 

^  Acts  xxiii.  7,  9  ;  xxiv.  14 ;  Mark  xii.  28  ;  Luke  xx.  39  ;  John  xi.  24. 
II  Luke  xiv.  40  ;  xx.  35  ;  John  v.  28,  29  ;  vi.  40,  44,  54  ;  xi.  23. 
T[  I  Cor.  XV  ;  Acts  iv.  2  ;  xvii.  31  ;  xxiv.  14,  15  ;   Rom.  viii.  23 ;   i   Cor.  vi.  14  ; 
l-hil.  iii.  II,  21  ;   i  Thess.  iv.  13-17;   Rev.  xx.  12  f. 
**Rom.  vi.  5-8;  Coll.  iii    i  ;  i.  18. 


i 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  651 

in  their  own  bodily  resurrection,  which  is  potentially  involved  in  his 
resurrection  who  is  the  beginninir,  the  first-born  from  the  dead,  the 
first  fruits  of  them  that  slept.*  He  is  the  Resurrection,  its  per- 
sonal principle,  its  life-centre.  Those  organically  united  with  him 
will,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  partake  of  his  resurrection-life,  will 
rise  with  him  out  of  death  unto  life  eternal. f  When  he  shall  ap- 
pear they  will  be  like  him,  their  vile  bodies  changed  and  fashioned 
like  unto  his  own  glorious  body.|  Neither  the  actual  resurrection 
of  our  Lord's  body,  nor  the  explicit  language  of  both  the  Master 
and  the  apostles,  can  admit  any  explanation  of  the  resurrection 
which  restricts  it  to  a  moral  rising  up  from  the  fall,  a  "standing 
again"  in  the  sphere  of  obedience  and  holiness,  or  interprets  it  as  a 
mere  figurative  representation  of  the  soul's  immortality,  or  places  its 
occurrence  immediately  after  death.  If  there  be  no  resurrection  like 
Christ's  then  is  Christ  not  risen,  and  in  the  surrender  of  that  historic 
and  fundamental  fact  is  involved  the  collapse  of  our  faith. §  Paul 
pronounces  it  an  error  subversive  of  the  faith  to  hold  that  the  resur- 
rection is  past  already,  ||  i.  e.,  experienced  in  our  spiritual  renewal. 

The  resurrection  is  uniformly  represented  as  taking  place  at  the 
last  day,^  the  dead  are  designated  nvev/iaTa,  spirits  now  destitute  of 
embodiment,  but  clothed  in  white  robes  and  awaiting  that  comple- 
tion of  the  world's  histoiy  which  cannot  transpire  until  the  coming 
of  the  Lord.** 

But  with  what  body  do  they  come?  While  the  explicit  Scripture 
representations  of  the  resurrection  cannot  be  satisfied  with  any  the- 
ory that  falls  short  of  the  coming  forth  of  the  body  from  the  grave, 
a  raising  to  life  of  what  was  sown  into  the  earth  in  death, ff  it  does 
not  follow  that  the  body  which  rises  will  be  absolutely  identical  with 
the  body  which  dies.  The  view  that  has  been  largely  maintained, 
of  an  entire  reproduction  of  all  the  organs  and  all  the  constituent 
elements  of  the  body,||  is  to  be  rejected — not  because  it  is  incom- 
prehensible and  deemed  impossible  by  science,  but  primarily  because 
it  has  no  warrant  in  the  word  of  God.     It  is  not  the  result  of  a  sci- 

*  Actsxxvi.  23  ;   i  Cor.  xv.  20  ;  vi,  14.  f  i  Thess.  iv.  14. 

J  Phil.  iii.  21.  ?  I  Cor.  xv,  14;  Acts  xvii.  31.  |i  2  Tim.  ii.  18. 

^  John  vi.  40,  54;  xi.  26. 

**  Heb.  xii.  23  ;  Rev.  vi.  9,  1 1  ;  2  Cor.  v.  3 ;   i  Thess.  iv.  13,  16, 

tt  I  Cor.  XV.  XX  Gerh.  viii,,  419.     So  also  Baier  and  others. 


652  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

entific  exegesis.  It  does  not  harmonize  with  clearly  established 
premises  in  regard  to  the  relations  and  conditions  of  the  future.  In 
that  day,  when  all  things  shall  be  glorified,  when  the  physical  shall 
be  transfigured  into  the  pneumatic,  when  all  the  results  of  redemp- 
tion shall  rise  from  a  terrestrial  to  a  celestial  and  spiritual  condition, 
it  is  preposterous  to  suppose  that  the  grand  harmony  should  be  dis- 
turbed by  such  an  incongruity  as  the  old  physical  body  with  its  flesh 
and  blood,  its  organs  of  nutrition  and  reproduction.  So  gross  a 
doctrine,  so  absurd  an  invention,  is  not  to  be  charged  upon  inspired 
teachers. 

The  soul  of  Webster  when  a  child  was  identical  with  the  soul  of 
the  statesman  expounding  the  Constitution  in  the  national  forum, 
yet  so  entirely  changed  that  its  identity  might  not  be  recognized. 
The  present  body  is  the  body  that  shall  rise  and  shine  forever,  yet 
it  differs  from  that  as  the  glory  of  a  terrestrial  body  differs  from  that 
of  a  celestial  one,  as  corruption  differs  from  incorruption,  as  a  psych- 
ical body  from  a  spiritual  body,  as  a  bare  seed  from  the  plant  which 
grows  out  of  it,  as  the  image  of  the  earthly  differs  from  the  image 
of  the  heavenly,  as  mortality  differs  from  immortality.*  Greater 
contrasts  than  these  are  inconceivable.  And  it  is  a  monstrous  per- 
version of  Scripture  to  wrest  from  them  the  perfect  identity  of  the 
resurrection  body  with  the  present  organism. 

So  far  from  teaching  this  literal,  realistic,  earthly  identity,  both 
the  Lord  and  St.  Paul  distinctly  deny  it.  "According  to  their 
unequivocal  word,  all  that  belongs  exclusively  to  the  senses  falls 
away  in  the  life  of  the  resurrection;  and  thus  must  all  be  at  once 
eliminated  from  our  notion  of  resurrection  which  is  opposed  to  the 
nature  of  a  spiritual  body."t  "It  is  indeed  this  body,"  says  Origen, 
"but  not  such  as  it  was."  Flesh  and  blood — and  St.  Paul  is  here 
not  on  the  subject  of  depravity — "  flesh  and  blood  shall  not  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Corruption  does  not  inherit  incorruption." 
Flesh  and  blood  do  not  essentially  constitute  the  body,  only  its 
present  structure  as  an  earthly,  physical  body. |  Why  should  the 
bodies  of  the  risen  be  identical  with  the  earthly  body,  when  this 
earthly  body,  clothing  the  saints  still  living,  shall  itself  be  changed 
at  the  very  moment  of  the  resurrection  ?  §  The  renewed  body  must 
be  adapted  to  its  new  sphere,  its  exalted  ofiice,  its  glorious  environ- 

*i  Cor.  XV.  40.  t  Van  Oosterzee,  Matt.  xxii.  30,  i  Cor.  vi.  13,  xv.  50. 

J  Burger.  ^  i  Cor.  xv.  52;  i  Thess.  iv.  15-17. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  653 

ment.  Hence  it  must  be  endowed  with  new  attributes,  with  spirit- 
ual quahties,  while  those  which  adapted  it  peculiarly  to  earthly  rela- 
tions disappear  with  its  earthly  state.*  In  its  innermost  core  it  will 
be  the  same  body  that  we  have  now,  even  as  the  polished  diamond 
is  in  substance  nothing  else  than  the  original  carbon.  Luther's 
views  on  this  point  are  noticeable  both  for  their  sublimity  and  their 
freedom  from  the  gross  extreme  so  largely  held  in  the  Church  : 
"  It  will  indeed  be  the  same  body,  but  with  changed  appearance  and 
adaptation,  not  given  to  eating,  drinking,  digestion,  etc.  It  will 
require  none  of  those  things  which  pertain  to  this  perishable  life  "  f 
— "a  body  unrestricted  by  the  limitations  of  space,  perfectly  adapted 
to  the  service  of  the  spirit  so  that  we  may  move  from  place  to  place 
as  the  sun  through  the  heavens,  yea  in  an  instant  be  down  upon 
the  earth  or  above  in  heaven."  "  It  is  called  a  new  spiritual  body 
because  it  will  be  spiritually  nourished,  sustained  by  God,  and  have 
its  life  immediately  in  him."  "  Since  flesh  and  blood  cannot  enter 
the  kingdom  of  God,  they  must  die,  dissolve  and  perish,  and  a  new 
spiritual  nature  must  arise  that  it  may  enter  into  heaven. "J 

The  essence  of  the  body  is  its  form,  which  throughout  the  earthly 
mode  of  existence  ever  keeps  the  same  in  spite  of  the  constant 
material  changes  going  on.  This  essential  form,  the  corporeal 
structure,  will  be  restored  each  to  its  own  soul  in  its  individual 
character  and  perfection,  so  that  each  person  in  the  final  judgment 
may  receive  -«  c^ta  tov  auua-og,  the  things  done  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  the  body. 

The  translators  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  have  done  wisely  in  giving 
us  the  expression  "resurrection  of  the  body" — a  phrase  more  scrip- 
tural and  therefore  less  likely  to  be  misunderstood  than  the  original 
term  anf)^.  The  German  translation  has  the  equivalent  of  the  origi- 
nal, although  Luther  maintained  that  "resurrection  of  the  body" 
was  much  more  intelligible  to  the  Saxon  mind  and  therefore  prefer- 
able.§  The  relation  of  the  new  body  to  the  old  is  accordingly 
characterized  both  by  sameness  and  by  distinction.  The  new  is  es- 
sentially one  in  form  and  in  elementary  substance  with  the  old,  but 
distinguished  from  it  by  its  endowments.  It  is  not  only  purified  from 
all  the  repulsive  disfiguration  and  weakness  resulting  from  inherent 
sinfulness,  and  restored  to  that  original  beauty  designed  by  the 
*  I  Cor.  vi.  13,  14;  Luke  xx.  36.  f  Vol.  xix.  133. 

X  Ibid.  243,  252,  255,  cf.  Gerhard  xx.  416  ff.  |  Cat.  Maj.,  Sym.  Lib.,  459. 


654  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Creator,  but  it  is  so  permeated  and  endowed  with  spiritual  power 
as  to  be  made  a  partaker  of  the  spirit's  life  and  immortality — no 
longer  a  hindrance  or  a  limitation  to  the  soul's  free  and  perfect  ac- 
tion, but  a  fitting  instrument  for  the  exercise  and  reflection  of  its 
loftiest  energies,  a  perfect  expression  of  its  peculiar  individuality. 
"  The  elementary  substance  after  having  passed  through  the  process 
of  dissolution,  having  become  purified  and  refined,  and  raised  above 
the  former  torpid  and  confined  condition,  will  itself  become  spiritual 
without  ceasing  to  be  material;  *  *  the  renewed  pneumatic  body 
will  serve  as  the  transparent  expression  of  the  sanctified  personality, 
the  mirror  of  its  internal  purity  and  moral  beauty."  *  "  The  aw/za 
7rveviua-(K6v  is  in  its  innermost  essence  identical  with  the  present  body, 
so  that  the  latter  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  iinexpanded  germ  of  the 
former,  the  former  as  the  glorious  development  of  the  latter."  f 

The  resurrection  body  of  our  Lord,  though  not  fully  glorified  be- 
fore the  ascension,  affords  some  illustration  of  the  change  which  the 
resurrection  body  undergoes.  How  unlike  his  form  so  familiar  to 
the  disciples!  Now  unrecognized  by  those  to  whom  he  was  nearest, 
now  coming  into  their  midst  in  a  closed  chamber,  now  manifesting 
himself  to  the  two  disconsolate  souls  on  their  way  to  Emmaus,  and 
then  suddenly  vanishing,  finally  floating  on  a  cloud  beyond  the 
reach  of  sight.  Surely  here  is  a  body  no  longer  subject  to  the  con- 
ditions of  a  purely  physical  organism.  It  is  not  restricted  to  space. 
It  has  the  power  of  revealing  itself  when  and  where  it  pleases  the 
Lord.  That  body  is  the  first  fruits.  Between  that  and  the  bodies  of 
believers  there  exists  a  vital  union,  so  that  as  they  have  borne  the 
image  of  the  earthy,  the  first  man,  they  shall  also  bear  the  image  of 
the  heavenly,  the  Lord  from  heaven. | 

The  same  considerations  which  assure  the  resurrection  unto  eter- 
nal life,  point  also  to  a  resurrrection  unto  shame  and  everlasting 
contempt  on  the  part  of  the  unregenerate.§  By  analogy  the  char- 
acter of  the  resurrection  bodies  of  the  ungodly  may  be  likewise  fore- 
shadowed. Nearly  all  the  declarations  of  Scripture  refer  exclusively 
to  the  resurrection  of  the  saints,  doubtless  for  the  reason  that  the 
doctrine  is  as  a  rule  presented  in  the  light  of  consolation  to  believers. 

*Thomasius,Christi  Person  u.  Werk.  f  Julius  Muller. 

X  I  Cor.  XV.  49.    For  the  language  of  the  Symbols  of.  Cat.  Maj.  458  f.      F.  C. 
520,  583.     On  the  Dogmaticians,  see  Schmid  and  Bretschneider. 
\  Dan.  xii.  2. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  655 

They  are  comforted  with  this  glorious  prospect  of  absolute  victory- 
over  death.  The  resurrection  of  the  wicked  receives  only  incidental 
mention.*  It  is  with  them  not  in  the  proper  sense  a  resurrection  to 
life,  a  "standing  again,"  but  an  awakening  unto  judgment  which  with 
this  event  will  be  finally  consummated,  and  which,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  righteous,  requires  the  entire  man,  body  and  soul,  to  appear  for 
judgment  and  to  participate  in  the  eternal  awards.  Hence,  as  Ger- 
lach  observes,  it  is  not  properly  a  resurrection,  it  is  a  continual 
dying,  it  is  the  second  death  instead  of  a  second  life.  There  is  ac- 
cordingly on  the  part  of  the  inspired  writers  no  attempt  to  describe 
the  body  which  awakes  only  to  receive  and  endure  its  awful,  eternal 
retribution.  But  as  the  condition  of  the  wicked  contrasts  in  every 
respect  with  that  of  the  godly,  we  may  conclude  that  this  opposite- 
ness  will  also  manifest  itself  in  the  resurrection  bodies,  and  from  the 
same  law  which  underlies  the  resurrection  of  the  just  it  follows  that 
the  bodies  of  the  wicked  will  at  the  resurrection  correspond  to  their 
state  of  shame  and  woe,  bear  the  impress  of  their  inward  deformity 
and  wickedness,  and  prove  a  source  and  an  instrument  of  their  eter- 
nal sufferings.  "  For  it  is  the  design  of  all  corporeity  to  be  the  im- 
age and  expression  of  what  is  within,  f  Hence,  "  Impiorum  corpora 
sunt  vasa  ad  ignominiam  et  contumeliam."  | 

4.  Eternal  Life. — Humanity  restored  and  perfected  in  the  entirety 
of  its  constitution  is  now  in  a  condition  to  receive  and  to  enjoy  the 
blessed  awards  of  the  righteous  Judge.  One  great  purpose  of  his 
coming  is  to  "bestow  upon  the  pious  and  elect  eternal  life  and  per- 
ennial joy." 

Who  are  properly  designated  by  these  titles  is  evident  from  Arts. 
V.  and  VI. :  those  namely  who  by  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
through  the  word  and  sacraments,  have  attained  the  faith  that  God 
alone  for  the  sake  of  Christ  justifies  those  who  believe  that  they  are 
received  into  favor  for  Christ's  sake,  and  in  whom  this  faith  hath 
brought  forth  good  fruits  in  loving  obedience  to  God's  command. 
As  the  specific  events  of  the  Parousia  and  the  Judgment  do  not,  as 
was  shown,  preclude  the  continual  coming  of  the  Lord  and  his  con- 
stant exercise  of  judgment  in  the  world,  so  also  the  gift  of  eternal 
life  bestowed  on  that  great  day  must  not  be  viewed  as  its  initial 
stage,  the  first  taste,  the  first  experience  of  the  nature  and  the  power 
of  an  endless  life.     That  life  is  the  immediate  result  of  the  believer's 


*John  V.  29.       f  Thomasius,  Christ!  Person  u.  Werk.       J  Gerhard  xix.,  38. 


656  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

union  with  Christ.  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  has  everlasting 
life.  The  instant  he  beheves  there  is  kindled  in  him,  in  its  incipient 
form,  that  same  life  which  he  will  receive  in  its  fullness  when  his  Lord 
in  whom  this  life  is  now  hid  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven.  The 
germ  of  life  begotten  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  earth  will  then  be 
unfolded  as  the  crown  of  life.  '  Holiness  and  blessedness  above  are 
but  the  perfection  of  what  was  initiated  by  saving  power  below.  Now 
are  we  the  sons  of  God,*  having  the  earnest  of  our  inheritance,  the 
first  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  while  we  await  the  redemption  of  the  body 
when  humanity  with  its  entire  organism  reconstructed  shall  be  in  a 
condition  to  enter  upon  the  fullness  of  joy  provided  by  divine  love 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world. 

The  nature  of  that  state  into  which  the  righteous  shall  finally 
enter  is  not  revealed  with  clearness.  These  lofty  heights  become 
invisible  from  their  very  brightness  and  elevation.  They  are  indeed 
represented  to  us  under  the  forms  of  the  most  attractive  and  exalted 
imagery,  but  the  very  "  abundance  of  this  imagery  overwhelms  us 
by  the  beauty  of  its  colors.  What  a  Paradise  has  that  is  charming, 
a  Father's  house  that  is  lovely,  a  city  of  God  that  is  attractive,  a 
Repast  that  is  refreshing,  a  Temple  that  is  sacred  and  blessed,"  f  all 
these  and  many  others  combine  to  exhibit  the  portion  of  those 
admitted  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Father.  Such  metaphors  are 
undoubtedly  designed  to  create  in  our  minds  some  conception  of 
Heaven  as  well  as  to  attract  our  hearts.  But  it  is  impossible  for 
earthly  imagery  and  earthly  language  to  impart  to  our  earthly  per- 
ception any  adequate  idea  of  scenes  that  lie  beyond  the  realm  of 
sense.  There  is  serious  danger  of  making  heaven  too  earthly,  too 
gross,  too  material,  and  we  are  very  significantly  admonished  that 
neither  sense,  reason  nor  feeling  can  forecast  what  God  hath  pre- 
pared for  them  that  love  him.  Revelation  alone  can  give  faith  a 
presentiment  by  the  Holy  Ghost.|  We  should  therefore  be  intent 
on  forming  spiritual  conceptions  of  the  state  of  glory,  without  ex- 
cluding the  important  truth  that  its  blessedness  is  such  as  to  be 
enjoyed  by  the  whole  man. 

The  negative  aspects  of  heaven  come  nearest  the  grasp  of  the 
understanding.  The  soul  will  be  absolutely  free  from  sin.  Through 
the  resurrection,  original  sin  will  have  been  utterly  uprooted  and  de- 

*  I  John  iii,  2  ;  Eph.  i.  14  ;  Rom.  viii.  23  ;   i  Pet.  i.  12. 

t  Van  Oosterzee.  J  i  Cor.  ii.  9, 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  657 

stroyed.  All  consciousness  of  guilt  will  be  swallowed  up  in  the  joy 
of  an  irrevocable  pardon  and  the  sense  of  perfect  harmony  with  the 
will  of  God.  The  soul  will  have  been  finally  rescued  from  all  the 
misery  to  which  the  transgression  of  God's  holy  law  exposed  it,  and 
if  heaven  had  nothing  further  in  store  than  the  absence  of  sin  with 
its  causes  and  consequences,  this  alone  would  be  an  inexhaustible 
fountain  of  joy  to  the  heart.  To  comprehend  furthermore  the  free- 
ness  and  the  fullness,  the  entire  scope  and  supreme  import  of  re- 
demption, to  apprehend  something  of  the  height  and  depth  of  that 
love  which  gave  itself  for  us,  to  realize  the  termination  of  the  con- 
flict with  flesh  and  sense  and  Satan,  and  to  enjoy  the  prospect  of 
everlasting  rest,  must  afford  to  ransomed  spirits  boundless  and  in- 
conceivable bliss. 

Some  of  the  positive  elements  of  eternal  life  fall  likewise  within 
our  present  reach.  Foremost  among  these  Avill  be  the  perfection  of 
man's  moral  development.  Life  in  heaven  implies  spiritual  ripe- 
ness, ethical  beauty,  moral  power,  joyful  obedience,  adoring  love 
and  gratitude  to  God,  complete  union  with  him  through  Christ. 
To  think  of  beings  entering  heaven  who  are  not  in  moral  accord  with 
the  key-note  of  its  bliss  is  to  annihilate  heaven  itself  Holiness  is  its 
first  characteristic.  The  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God.  When  they 
shall  see  him  as  he  is  they  will  be  like  him,  purified  even  as  he  is 
pure,  partakers  of  his  nature.*  The  perfection  of  bliss  follows  from 
the  perfection  of  the  whole  man.f 

As  just  indicated,  it  is  clearly  taught  that  the  blessed  will  enjoy 
the  vision  of  God.  The  saints  are  forever  with  the  Lord.  Their 
joy  flows  essentially  from  his  presence.^  The}'  have  the  visio 
beatijica.  Quenstedt  calls  this  "  the  immediate  sight  of  God,"  and 
others  specifically  designate  his  essence  as  the  object  of  the  vi.sion 
beatific.  While  some  regard  the  intuitive  reason  as  the  organ  of 
this  vision  and  make  the  latter  to  consist  in  the  immediate  ecstatic 
contemplation  of  the  nature  of  God  by  the  eye  of  the  spirit,  others 
have  even  thought  that  it  would  be  mediated  by  the  glorified  eye  of 
the  body,  and  still  another  view  is  that  of  an  immediate  knowledge 
of  God,  such  as  spirits  have  of  one  another. 


■•'  Matt.  V.  8  ;   i  John  ill.  2,  3;  2  Pet.  i.  4. 

t  I  Cor.  xiii.  9  f.;  Eph.  v.  27. 

J  Job  xix.  26  f. ;  Ps.  xvi.  11,  xvii.  15,  xlii.  2  ;  i  Thess.  iv.  17;  Rev.  xxii.  3,  etc. 


658  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

Inasmuch  as  God  in  his  infinite  essence  is  invisible,*  the  beatific 
vision  must  be  conceived  of  rather  as  the  sense  of  his  pecuHar  near- 
ness, the  realization  of  his  glory,  the  recognition  of  his  gracious 
manifestations,  which  in  a  measure  were  vouchsafed  to  his  saints  on 
earth  and  the  promise  of  which  often  cheered  and  sustained  them.f 
Thus,  even  in  this  life,  men  have  seen  him  that  is  invisible.^  Faith 
in  proportion  to  its  strength  gives  the  pure  in  heart,  even  amidst  the 
dimness  and  darkness  of  this  life,  a  vision  of  God,  a  view  of  his 
perfections  such  as  the  world  cannot  have.§  The  full  vision  of  God 
results  from  the  most  intimate  communion  of  will  and  life  and  love 
with  God.  This  is  effected  through  Christ,  and  herewith  we  find 
doubtless  the  most  satisfactory  solution  of  this  subject.  In  the  ex- 
alted, glorified,  personal  presence  of  the  God-man,  the  Logos, 
through  whom  God  has  ever  revealed  himself,  saints  will  have  the 
vision  of  God.  They  who  behold  the  Son  will  then  in  a  heavenly 
sense  behold  in  him  also  the  Father.  All  the  revelations  and  gifts 
of  God  to  man  are  communicated  through  Christ.  The  crowning 
revelation,  the  vision  of  God,  will  come  through  the  same  medium. 
Our  relation  to  God,  through  the  mediator  Jesus  Christ,  is  eternal. 
The  infinite  light  and  life  that  rise  in  the  invisible  heart  of  the 
Father  stream  to  us  from  the  theanthropic  heart  of  the  glorified 
Son,  the  Omega  as  well  as  the  Alpha  of  our  redemption,  our  guide 
forever  to  the  living  fountains. ||  The  Lamb  will  be  in  the  midst  of 
the  throne,  the  light  of  the  eternal  city,  the  mediating  cause  and 
centre  of  all  blessedness.  Now,  rejoicing  in  unclouded  communion 
M^ith  the  God-man,  saints  will  have  the  most  perfect  communion  of 
love  and  of  life  with  the  Father  and  through  the  Holy  Ghost.  It 
is,  in  fact,  their  particular  relation  to  the  enthroned  redeemer,  their 
ever-brightening,  ever-deepening  knowledge  of  owing  their  salva- 
tion entirely  to  him,  that  will  constitute  the  peculiar  occasion  of 
their  perennial  praise  and  thanksgiving.  This  distinguishes  their 
joy  and  their  glory  from  that  of  the  angels. T[ 

The  fellowship  with  one  another,  which  is  a  marked  feature  of  the 
joy  of  heaven,  the  redeemed  will  have  likewise  through  him  who 

*  I  Tim.  vi.  10;  Exod.  xxxiii.  20;  John  i.  18. 

f  Gen.  xxiii.  30;  Deut.  v.  24;  Is.  vi.  5;  Gerh.,  ix,  277. 

X  Heb.  xi.  2.  ^ohn  xiv.  21-23,  ^^11.  24. 

II  Rev.  vii.  17.  1[Rev.  v.  8,  9. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  659 

has  not  only  united  God  and  man,  but  who  has  also  bound  man  to 
man  in  the  most  loving  and  lofty  brotherhood.  The  separation  made 
between  men  by  sin,  the  envy,  the  hatred,  the  strife,  the  violence  that 
have  raged  among  those  who  are  formed  of  one  blood,  are  taken 
away  in  Christ,  and  through  him,  their  common  Head,  men  are 
drawn  together  again.  He  dwells  in  each  and  thus  effects  their 
union  with  each  other,  filling  all  with  the  same  life,  so  that  as  once 
they  all  suffered  when  one  member  suffered,  now  they  all  rejoice  in 
one  another,  the  joy  of  one  is  the  joy  of  all.*  This  is  undoubtedly 
the  significance  of  the  Feast,  under  which  figure  eternal  life  is  so 
often  exhibited.  Heaven  is  the  synonym  of  society,  the  most  loving 
association  of  kindred  spirits  who  have  in  each  other  a  perennial 
feast — the  Lord  at  the  head  of  the  table  drinking  with  them  the  new 
wine  of  the  kingdom.  The  restrictions,  the  hypocrisies,  the  artificial 
forms  that  characterize  earthly  society,  will  be  displaced  by  perfect 
freedom,  transparency,  congeniality.  The  unison  of  character  will 
bind  together  the  prince  and  the  beggar.f  Social  converse  among 
refined  and  elevated  spirits  gives  even  here  the  noblest  enjoyment; 
how  infinitely  more  glorious  there,  where  the  select  nobility  of  char- 
acter shall  be  gathered  from  all  ages  and  shall  sit  together  in  heav- 
enly places  in  Christ  Jesus. 

The  joy  of  such  a  fellowship  is  inconceivable,  except  on  the  basis 
of  the  mutual  recognition  of  those  chosen  and  perfected  unto  eter- 
nal life.  Although  it  is  clearly  indicated  that  earthly  and  temporal 
relationships  shall  have  disappeared,;};  yet,  memory  being  undestroyed 
and  knowledge  infinitely  heightened,  the  hope  that  we  shall  know 
each  other  there  is  certainly  not  without  warrant  in  reason.  The 
Scriptures,  however,  offer  on  this  point  nothing  beyond  bare  intima- 
tions,§  much  as  poetry  and  the  natural  longings  of  the  human  heart 
— themselves  a  prophecy  of  the  heavenly  recognition — may  have 
dilated  upon  it.  Some  hold  that  this  is  presupposed,  but  the  reserve 
of  Scripture  ought  to  admonish  us.  We  are  only  too  prone  to  base 
our  highest  ideal  of  eternal  life  upon  the  hope  of  having  our  loved 
ones  there  given  back  to  us.  We  would  fain  circumscribe  the  heav- 
enly joy  as  we  do  the  earthly  to  our  own  immediate  family,  but  the 

*John  xvii.  21-23;  ^'^-  i~5- 

t  Luke  xvi.  23.  J  Luke  xx.  35,  36. 

§  Matt.  xvii.  3  ;  Luke  xvi.  9,  23  ;  John  xvi.  22  ;   i  Thess.  ii.  19,  20 ;  iv.  17,  18. 


66o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

prospect  of  glory  as  disclosed  to  us  is  not  that  we  depart  to  be  with 
our  loved  ones,  but  to  be  with  our  Loved  One — not  primarily  to  have 
an  eternal  family  reunion,  but  to  be  "  forever  with  the  Lord." 

While  rest  and  peace  and  joy  are  foreshadowed  as  essential  ele- 
ments in  the  happiness  of  glory,  that  state  must  not  be  viewed  as 
the  paradise  of  idleness.  Even  earthly  life,  weighed  down  with  clogs, 
means  action,  motion,  occupation,  how  much  more  the  life  eternal, 
which  is  as  much  more  intense  than  the  present  as  it  is  more  endur- 
ing. It  implies  capacity  for  supreme  activity.  Heaven  will  not  be 
a  museum  of  fossils  or  a  gallery  of  sculpture.  We  cannot  doubt 
that  both  the  objective  scenes  of  glory  and  the  subjective  capabilities 
will  be  so  adapted  to  each  other  as  to  secure  to  the  redeemed  the 
highest  and  most  constant  employment  without  exhaustion  and 
without  weariness.  Not  labor,  but  labor  "  in  the  sweat  of  thy  face" 
is  the  curse  of  sin. 

Of  the  nature  of  the  saints'  occupation  we  may  form  no  proper 
conception,  especially  in  its  relations  to  the  body,  except  so  far  as  it 
serves  the  soul  as  its  organ  and  reflection  ;  but  who  can  doubt  that 
the  mental  faculties,  relieved  from  all  the  burdens  and  fetters  that 
hindered  their  free  and  full  activity  here,  and  immeasurably  quick- 
ened and  exalted,  with  the  full  revelation  of  God's  glory  exciting 
every  sense  and  affection,  will  be  kindled  into  a  degree  of  action 
transcending  everything  of  which  we  now  know  or  dream.  The 
mind  has  here  at  best  but  a  partial  development.  It  merely  grapples 
the  objects  it  pursues.  There  it  may  go  on  expanding  forever, 
mounting  to  the  highest  truth,  mastering  the  most  glorious  task. 
One  need  but  think  of  all  the  unsolved  problems  in  redemption,  the 
profound  mysteries  of  theology,  the  inscrutable  course  of  provi- 
dence, the  transcendent  and  appalling  questions  of  philosophy,  to 
see  that  opportunities  will  not  be  wanting  to  call  for  the  most  intense 
exercise  of  the  intellectual  powers,  and  that  under  the  refulgence  of 
that  light  which  renders  the  sun  superfluous,  there  will  be  a  pursuit 
of  knowledge  without  hindrance  and  a  progress  in  it  without  limit. 
So  analogy  suggests  an  ever-increasing  measure  of  moral  and  spirit- 
ual perfection  through  the  continuous  exercise  of  the  moral  endow- 
ments and  the  religious  faculty.  Established  in  holiness  beyond  the 
liability  of  sinning,  the  saints  will  yet  be  capable  of  higher  and  higher 
reaches,  and  destined  to  a  career  of  endless  progression  toward  the 
absolute  holiness  of  God,  without  ever  passing  the  line  that  separates 


ci-irist's  return  to  judgment.  66 1 

the  finite  from  the  infinite.  Besides,  with  the  ever-widening  knowl- 
edge of  the  glorious  attributes  of  God  there  will  be  an  ever-deepen- 
ing love  for  him,  a  fuller  moral  appreciation  of  his  salvation,  and  a 
more  intense  outpouring  of  thanksgiving  and  praise.*  Not  eternal 
sameness,  therefore,  is  the  law  of  heaven,  but  eternal  growth  and 
development.  Eternal  rest  will  be  enjoyed  in  the  sphere  of  eternal 
activity.  "The  characteristic  of  perfection  is  not  absolute,  unalter- 
able sameness,  but  the  harmonious  blending  of  unity  and  variety, 
individuality  and  solidarity,  of  spirit  and  nature,  of  ethical  divine 
beauty  and  realistic  divine  glory — a  conjunction  of  receptivity  and 
activity. "t 

This  fully  meets  the  objection  that  endless  sameness  of  occupa- 
tion, of  even  the  noblest  enjoyment,  is  inseparable  from  the  idea  of 
tedium  and  wearisomeness.  Eternity  is  not  a  mere  succession  of 
time,  a  simple  unchanging  continuity,  such  as  here  wearies  the  mind 
whether  employed  or  not,  nor  are  we  to  think  of  such  a  partial  ex- 
ercise of  the  faculties  as  leaves  some  dormant  while  others  are  on  a 
strain,  but 

"  Every  power  finds  sweet  employ," 

while  the  stream  of  bliss  flows  on  uninterrupted,  ever  changing  yet 
ever  the  same.  There  is  no  danger  that  the  joys  of  eternal  life  will 
lose  their  ineffable  relish  through  unchanging  continuance.  Such  is 
the  boundless  extent,  beauty  and  glory  of  the  material  world  that  one 
might  here  be  unintermittingly  absorbed  in  the  contemplation  and 
study  of  these  wonders.  Yet  these  are  but  the  vague  shadows  of  the 
illimitable  realm  of  spirit,  the  dim  reflection  of  the  Creator's  resplen- 
dent glory.  If  the  fullness  of  these  can  never  be  exhausted,  and 
men's  hearts  kindle  more  and  more  the  longer  they  contemplate 
them,  how  can  the  joy  of  the  saints  ever  be  palled  with  the  vision  of 
his  infinite  personal  perfections  reflected  in  infinite  revelations  of 
glory? 

Thus  the  idea  of  degrees  of  blessedness  may  be  argued.  If  there 
is  progression  it  is  self-evident  that  every  new  stage  attained  is 
higher  than  the  previous  one.  Nor  is  the  ratio  of  growth  the  same 
with  all,  any  more  than  the  measure  of  their  fruitfulness  here.|  One 
star  differeth  from  another  star  in  glory.  §     All  were  originally  not 


*  Rev.  vii.  9,  10.  f  Thomasius,  Christi  Person  u.  Werk. 

J  Matt.  xiii.  8,  23.  '    gi  Cor.  xv.  41,  42;  2  Cor.  ix.  6;  Luke  xix.  15-19. 

34 


662  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

endowed  with  equal  capacities  nor  favored  with  the  same  privileges. 
The  redeemed  will  preserve  their  individuality.  To  the  noble  army 
of  martyrs  who  attested  their  faith  with  their  blood,  the  Church 
spontaneously  assigns  the  highest  rank.  "  Erunt  enim  discrimina 
gloriae  sanctorum."*  All  share  essentially  the  same  eternal  life, 
but  there  are  "bona  accessoria,"  "the  same  essential  blessedness  yet 
difference  in  accidental  endowments,"  "accessory  rewards."  t  A 
crown  awaits  all,  but  each  has  its  peculiar  adornments.  All  who 
are  in  vital  union  with  Christ  shall  participate  in  his  glory,  yet  the 
illustrious  founders  of  his  kingdom  are  ordained  to  twelve  specific 
thrones  when  the  Son  of  Man  shall  be  seated  on  his  throne.  J 

That  these  distinctions  and  grades  are  due  in  a  measure  to  the 
principle  of  rewards,  does  not  in  any  wise  detract  from  the  riches  of 
God's  grace,  or  render  eternal  life  any  less  the  free  gift  of  sovereign 
mercy.  All  owe  their  salvation  and  their  glory  to  infinite  grace, 
yet  after  their  pardon  and  renewal  the  career  of  some  has  been  more 
deserving,  more  meritorious,  than  that  of  others.  All  have  not 
loved  equally,  nor  suffered  equally;  and  while  it  is  still  grace  that 
confers  each  separate  honor,  while  it  is  nevermore  payment  as  of 
a  debt,  the  reward  in  each  case  infinitely  transcending  the  desert, 
and  given  alone  for  the  merits  of  Christ,  yet  does  the  measure  of 
our  service  and  suffering  in  some  degree  determine  the  measure  of 
honor  and  glory  that  awaits  us,  so  that  there  will  be  rendered  to 
every  man  according  to  his  deeds.  §  The  toil  and  conflict  of  perse- 
vering faith  will  by  no  means  be  overlooked  in  the  final  award. 

Nor  is  there  any  danger  that  the  perfect  harmony  of  heaven  will 
be  disturbed  by  such  distinctions.  Harmony,  so  far  from  excluding 
diversity  and  gradations,  is  the  result  of  them.  Each  will  share  in 
the  glory  of  the  whole  and  the  whole  will  participate  in  the  glory  of 
each,  so  intimate  is  the  fellowship,  so  ardent  the  love  for  each  other, 
and  so  admirable  the  divine  plan  of  diversity  in  unity. 

The  New  Testament  representations  of  eternal  life  appear  to 
embrace  the  idea  of  locality  as  well  as  that  of  state  or  condition. 
They  identify  heaven  with  the  radiant  abode  of  God  and  the  angels, 
which  the  Old  Testament  conceived  as  located  beyond  the  stars. 
The  dogmaticians  represent  it  as  "  a  certain  Voi)  in  which  the  elect 
partake  of  eternal  joy  and  glory,  called  heaven  on  account  of  its 

*  Apol.  Conf.  pp.  146,  148,  1 20.  t  Quenstedt  i ,  p.  559.  J  MaU.  xix.  28. 

^Apol.  Conf.  148;  Rom.  ii.  6;  i  Cor.  iii.  6;  Rev.  xxii.  12;  John  xii.  26. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  66t, 

beauty,  height,  immensity  and  majesty,"  "the  place  in  which  the 
blessed  will  see  God,"*  although  they  admit  the  impossibility  of 
determining  anything  concerning  the  place  or  its  character.  As 
there  is  to  be  a  new  earth,  as  it  would  accord  with  the  idea  of  eter- 
nal fitness  that  the  planet  on  which  our  Lord  wore  the  crown  of 
thorns  should  also  honor  him  with  the  royal  diadem,  and  that  the 
ground  which  was  cursed  through  man's  sin  should  with  him  be 
also  renewed  and  glorified,  it  is  not  an  unreasonable  hope  that  this 
earth  may  be  the  future  and  eternal  home  of  redeemed  humanity.f 

The  Holy  City,  the  New  Jerusalem  shall  come  down  from  God 
out  of  heaven  and  fill  the  earth  with  the  glory  of  God.  Heaven  will 
thus  blend  with  earth,  the  boundary  line  bet\yeen  the  two  will  be 
effaced,  and  the  tabernacle  of  God  set  up  with  men.| 

5.  Eternal  PimisJimcnt.  With  the  complete  triumph  of  the  church 
and  the  attainment  of  man's  blessed  goal  will  coincide  the  discom- 
fiture and  destruction  of  her  enemies.  Coming  at  last  as  Judge  the 
Lord  "  will  condemn  wicked  men  and  devils  to  be  forever  tor- 
mented." The  judgment  will  not  merely  make  manifest  the  su- 
preme distinction  between  the  good  and  the  evil,  but  to  the  latter 
like  the  former  it  will  prove  a  just  and  final  retribution.  With 
the  light  of  Omniscience  turned  upon  their  inward  condition  and 
their  history,  the  wicked  will  appear  in  the  frightful  reality  of  their 
state  and  receive  the  ultimate  and  awful  penalty  of  their  deeds. 

In  the  world's  true  development  there  can  be  no  other  outcome  to 
the  moral  government  of  the  universe.  God's  hatred  of  sin  is  no 
mere  dream.  The  history  of  mankind  is  a  fiery  illustration  of  his 
terrible  wrath  against  disobedience.  The  very  face  of  nature  shows 
the  awful  traces  of  his  judgment.  A  universal  elegy  sounds 
throughout  the  chambers  of  creation.  Nature  animate  and  inanimate 
is  groaning  under  the  curse  of  a  world's  sin.  And  yet  the  rebellion 
goes  on — grim,  determined,  unchecked,  resisting  alike  the  pleas  of 
mercy  and  recovery,  and  the  threats  of  wrath  and  woe.  With  all 
the  natural  consequences  of  evil  and  the  evident  positive  punishments 
that  are  unerringly  inflicted  upon  it  even  here,  the  hand  of  divine  jus- 
tice is  stayed  by  the  arm  of  divine  mercy.  The  king  is  on  the  throne 
now  to  save,  and,  intent  on  the  gracious  work  of  recovering  a  fallen 
world,  he  endures  with  infinite  long-suffering  the  present  continu- 

*  Gerhard.  Matt.  v.  12,  vi.  20  ;  Luk,  vi,  23,  xii.  33  ;  John.  xvii.  24 ;  i  Pet.  i.  14. 

fMatt  V.  5.  X  Rev.  xxi.  23. 


664  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ance  of  evil,  reserving  the  final  verdict  and  its  execution  until  the 
great  and  terrible  day  of  his  wrath  shall  have  come.*  Whatever  of 
punishment  is  now  administered  is  confessedly  only  partial,  a  sure 
promise  of  full  and  final  retribution  to  the  impenitent. 

On  this  doctrine  the  Scriptures  are  fearfully  explicit.  They  de- 
nounce terrible  punishments  upon  all  who  continue  in  disobedience, 
unbelief  and  impenitence. f  The  most  horrible  imagery  is  em- 
ployed to  exhibit  the  sufferings  which  are  in  reserve  for  those  who 
die  in  their  sins,j;  and  the  fact  that  the  representations  of  them  are 
largely  or  wholly  figurative  does  not  relieve  but  rather  intensify 
their  frightful  character.  The  best  teachings  of  reason  point  unmis- 
takably to  the  same  .denouement.  Whatever  goodish  sentimentalism 
for  evil-doers  may  prevail  in  some  quarters,  whatever  general  indif- 
ference may  be  felt  toward  wickedness  owing  to  our  familiarity  with 
it,  and  in  view  of  our  own  participation  in  it,  both  reason  and  con- 
science make  us  at  times  hear  their  demand  for  the  punishment  of 
wickedness.  The  culpability  of  sin  allows  of  no  other  issue.  There 
are  cases  in  which  unrighteousness  reaches  such  proportions  that 
the  very  stones  call  for  retribution,  and  nothing  is  regarded  as  so  det- 
rimental to  the  common  welfare  and  so  destructive  to  society  as  the 
escape  of  the  evil-doer  unvvhipped  of  justice.  The  inextinguishable 
moral  sense  within  us  cannot  endure  the  thought  of  his  crimes  go- 
ing unpunished.  It  is  a  necessity  of  our  moral  being  that  we  are 
pained  when  the  wicked  do  not  suffer.  This  feeling  of  indignation, 
at  wrong  therefore  we  justly  ascribe  to  God.  § 

The  objection  that  man  suffers  sufficiently  for  his  misdeeds  in  this 
life  is  without  any  real  force.  Although  misery  is  here  inseparable 
from  sin,  it  would  be  impossible  to  demonstrate  that  the  most  wicked 
endure  the  severest  suffering.  Nay,  quite  the  reverse  is  psychologi- 
cally evident.  The  longer  and  the  deeper  men's  continuance  in  sin, 
the  more  insensible  they  grow  to  its  punishments.  The  more  a  man 
deserves  penalty,  the  less  he  suffers  its  infliction.  No  one  in  fact  can 
ever  have  anything  like  a  just  and   adequate  punishment   until  he 


*  Rev.  vi.  17,  xi.   18. 

tjohniii.  36;  Matt.  xiii.  41,  42  ;  2  Thess.  i.  8,  9 ;  Rev.  xxi.  8. 

t  Rev.  xiv.  lof.;  xix.20;  xx.   14,15;  xxi.  8  ;  Matt.  ii.  30;  v.  22,  29,  30 ;  xviii. 
8  ;  XXV.  41  ;  Mark  ix.  43-45  ;  Jude  6,  13. 

I].  P.  Thompson,  "Love  and  Penalty."     Cicero's  First  Oration  against  Cata- 
line. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  665 

sees  himself  as  he  really  is,  until  in  the  presence  of  embodied  and 
absolute  holiness  he  awakens  to  the  revelation  of  his  true  condition 
and  the  awful  import  of  sin.  He  must  "come  to  himself,"  he  must 
have  in  his  soul  the  sense  of  God's  holy  wrath  against  sin,  ere  he 
can  have  any  suffering  at  all  commensurate  with  his  disobedience 
and  depravity.  Apart  from  this,  punishment  can  never  answer  its 
just  purpose.  Independent  of  the  Scriptures,  accordingly,  reason, 
with  its  slumbering  but  never  extinct  categorical  imperative,  with 
its  inexorable  demand  that  wrong  shall  be  punished,  and  with  its 
recognition  of  a  present  power  that  makes  for  righteousness,  and  in 
part  judges-  sin  even  in  this  sphere  of  mingled  good  and  evil,*  utters 
the  direful  prophecy  of  an  ultimate  retribution.  God's  government 
of  the  world  becomes  an  appalling  riddle  if  at  the  end  of  its  course 
there  remains  no  punishment  for  the  wicked.  But  for  the  convic- 
tion that  the  penalty  is  only  delayed  to  the  proper  day  and  that 
retribution  is  absolutely  certain,  despair  must  settle  down  upon  the 
moral  universe,  the  forces  of  our  moral  nature  suffer  a  total  wreck, 
and  society  experience  inevitable  dissolution,  f 

Reason  believes  in  a  divine  ruler,  believes  that  the  attributes  of 
divine  wisdom,  justice  and  righteousness  are  eternally  active  in  be- 
half of  the  moral  order  of  the  world.  It  believes  that  according  to 
analogy,  evil  like  good  will  have  its  ultimate  goal,  its  appropriate 
results.  Hence  it  concludes  that  there  will  be  no  breaking  down  of 
the  divine  law  when  the  final  crisis  arrives,  no  paralysis  of  judgment 
in  the  moment  of  its  final  execution.  God  is  not  mocked.  We 
claim  perfection  for  no  other  government,  but  in  the  kingdom  of 
God  the  sowing  must  be  harvested.  As  the  supreme  moral  judge 
there  rests  with  God  the  authority  and  the  power,  some  would  say 
the  obligation,  of  enforcing  the  penalt}'  for  transgression.  That  he 
is  even  now  in  terrible  earnest,  that  his  wrath  is  revealed  from 
heaven  against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men,  is 
dreadfully  evident ;]{;  but  what  is  this  provisional  condemnation  of 
sin  compared  with  that  awful  revelation  of  wrath  when  he  shall  ap- 
pear upon  his  judicial  throne  and  judgment  will  be  no  longer  delayed 
by  forbearance  nor'tempered  by  mercy. 

The  objection  urged  on  the  score  of  the  infinite  benevolence  of 

*Jer.  ii.  19. 

t  Ps.  Ixxiii.    Plutarch,  "  Delay  of  the  Deity  in  the  punishment  of  the  wicked." 

JRom.  i.  18. 


666  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

God,  would  bear  equally  against  all  retributive  consequences  of  sin 
upon  earth.  Besides,  it  must  ever  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Infi- 
nite is  not  a  being-  of  a  single  attribute  which  sways  all  his  actions. 
He  is  at  once  a  God  of  absolute  justice  and  boundless  mercy,  and 
with  him  these  two  perfections  are  not  in  conflict,  but  in  supreme 
harmony. 

But  why,  it  may  be  asked,  should  the  devils  receive  their  sen- 
tence along  with  that  of  wicked  men?     We  remark: 

1.  That  that  day  is  in  every  sense  and  for  all  the  world  the  period 
of  judgment.  If  there  had  even  been  no  connection  between 
devils  and  men,  the  judgment  of  the  former  Would  as  truly  fall 
within  this  period  as  the  trial  and  punishment  of  different  criminals 
occurs  in  the  session  of  the  same  court  and  under  the  same  judge, 
although  they  sustain  no  other  relations  to  each  other  than  that  of 
being  alike  transgressors  of  the  law. 

2.  The  devils  have  been  so  directly  connected  with  the  entrance 
of  sin  among  mankind  and  its  course  of  human  development,  as  to 
render  it  meet  that  when  the  full  results  of  sin  upon  humanity  shall 
be  made  apparent  and  forever  fixed,  the  authors  of  all  this  wretch- 
edness should  then  once  and  for  all  realize  their  own  doom  and 
punishment. 

3.  The  power  of  sin  in  the  world  is  viewed  by  the  Scripture  as 
an  organized  realm,  a  kingdom  with  its  legitimate  head  and  minis- 
ters and  subjects.  This  kingdom  is  in  direct  and  deadly  opposition 
to  the  kingdom  of  Christ;  the  latter  was  established  for  the  over- 
throw of  the  former,  hence  the  ultimate  victory  of  the  empire  of 
righteousness  will  signalize  the  absolute  overthrow  and  irretrievable 
ruin  of  all  the  powers  and  subjects  of  darkness.*  Joined  to  each 
other  in  life,  in  their  enmity  to  God  and  righteousness, f  it  is  fit  that 
they  should  go  down  together  to  the  realm  originally  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  his  angels. J 

The  precise  nature  of  those  torments  to  which  wicked  men  and 
devils  are  to  be  condemned,  we  are  not  able  to  define.  They  are 
represented  under  types  of  material  figures,  which  disclose,  indeed, 
their  horrible  and  irremediable  character,!  but  as  they  are  sufferings 
in  another  sphere  of  existence,  where  all  the  circumstances  will  be 

*Rev.  XX.  10;  Jude  6.  t  Acts  xiii.  10. 

X  Matt.  xiii.  25,  38  ;  John  viii.  44;   1  John  iii.  8. 

g  Matt.  viii.  12;  xiii.  41  f . ;  xxv.  41 ;  2  Thess.  i.  7-9. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  667 

entirely  changed,  it  is  impossible  now  to  conceive  or  portray  their 
specific  forms.  Future  punishment  will  necessarily  differ  in  many 
respects  from  temporal  punishment.  "  The  latter  was  partly  de- 
layed by  the  long-suffering,  partly  lessened  by  the  mercy  of  God, 
partly  concealed  from  the  eyes  of  others,  partly  confined  within  a 
certain  space;  in  the  future  retribution  the  opposite  of  all  this  will 
be  the  case."*  In  all  things  the  counterpart  of  heaven,  the  indica- 
tion seems  conclusive  that  this  punishment  will  be  endured  not  only 
in  a  certain  subjective  state,  but  in  an  actual  place,  however  igno- 
rant we  may  be  of  its  location  or  its  peculiar  nature.  Such  expres- 
•sions  as  bTrov,^  ekei,X  ek  -<>"  tottop  roi;roi',§  imply  something  beyond  the 
sense  of  the  divine  wrath  or  the  horrors  of  conscience.  They  point 
to  a  local  habitation. 

Besides,  the  condemned,  as  we  have  seen,  are  to  enter  into  what 
was  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels. ||  That  a  state  purely 
subjective  could  be  prepared  for  one  class  of  beings  and  then  taken 
possession  of  by  another,  is  inconceivable.  Devils  and  other 
damned  spirits  may  have  a  hell  within  them,  and  at  the  same  time 
be  confined  to  a  hell  around  them.  As  a  place  fitted  up  for  devils 
and  adapted  to  the  condition  of  those  who  share  their  moral  condi- 
tion and  their  miserable  fate,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  its  peculiar 
character  and  environment  will  combine  to  aggravate  their  woe.  It 
must  be  an  inconceivable,  dreary,  loathsome,  horrible  realm,  an  in- 
fernal prison-house,  the  blackness  of  darkness.^ 

Subjectively  considered,  the  extreme  misery  of  the  damned  may 
be  regarded,  negatively,  as  the  privation  of  all  good,  the  loss  of  all 
that  was  pursued  as  good  on  earth,  as  well  as  the  final  loss 
of  that  which  should  have  been  the  suniminn  bomun.  The  desire 
for  sensuous  and  earthly  indulgences  will  doubtless  continue  and 
with  an  ever-increasing  intensity,  but,  as  the  means  of  obtaining 
them  are  no  more  at  hand,  this  insatiable  craving  can  be  answered 
only  by  the  wail  of  despair.  Since  God  is  the  soul's  true  portion, 
and  holy  conformity  to  his  law  its  essential  medium  of  happiness, 
final  exclusion  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his 
power,**  the  complete  absence  of  harmony  with  his  will  and  a  total 

*Van  Oosterzee.  -      f  Mark  ix.  44,  46,  48. 

X  Matt.  viii.  12  ;  xiii.  42.  g  Luke  xvi.  28  ;  Acts  i.  25. 

II  Matt.  XXV.  41.  1fjude6.  **  2  Thess.  i.  9. 


668  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

separation  from  all  the  elements  of  joy  and  blessedness  which, 
through  the  institutions  of  grace  and  the  presence  of  godly  souls, 
still  intermingled  with  the  course  of  the  unholiest  earthly  life,  this 
absolute  withdrawal  of  every  fountain  of  blessedness  must  leave  the 
lost  in  a  state  of  inconceivable  woe.  The  portraiture  of  the  rich  man 
in  hell  is  a  picture  of  direful  want,  exquisite,  helpless,  tormenting  des- 
titution, aggravated  by  the  memory  of  former  bounty,  the  conscious- 
ness of  lost  opportunity,  the  dread  of  increasing  miseries,  the  knowl- 
edge of  others'  bliss,  the  unavailing  cry  for  some  alleviation,  all 
heightened  by  the  reproaching  consciousness  of  having  had  it  in  his 
power  to  escape  this  lot.  How  the  soul  must  writhe  under  this  aggre- 
gation of  horrors,  this  intolerable  burden  of  its  own  accumulated 
sins  and  follies  and  losses.  The  strength,  too,  of  the  condemned* 
as  well  as  all  other  resources  by  which  men  in  this  life  support  their 
burdens,  will  likewise  have  passed  from  them,  so  that  what  they 
might  with  a  degree  of  fortitude  have  endured  in  the  flesh  becomes 
insupportable  imder  the  consciousness  of  utter  imbecilit}-.  Some 
alleviation  might  be  thought  of,  but  they  cannot  move  toward  the 
fountain  from  which  a  single  drop  might  assuage  their  torment, 
they  cannot  communicate  with  others  whose  detention  from  their 
place  of  torment  might  make  one  atom  less  in  the  concentrated  bit- 
terness of  their  cup. 

They  must  likewise  realize  the  deep  shame  of  their  condition. 
The  judgment  will  make  a  revelation  of  men,  will  disclose  the 
secrets  of  their  hearts,  expose  as  under  the  glare  of  flaming  fire  the 
unsightly  deformities  and  pollutions,  the  inherent  baseness  of  sin  ! 
and  under  the  changed  scenes  and  the  awful  consciousness  of  reali- 
ties, souls  must  feel  how  despicable  they  have  made  themselves  in 
the  sight  of  men,  of  angels  and  of  God,  while  the  vision  of  the  glori- 
fied who  were  washed  from  their  sins  and  transformed  into  heavenly 
beauty,  and  the  view  of  the  horrible  circle  of  their  debased  compan- 
ship  and  diabolical  surroundings,  must  inspire  them  with  unutter- 
able self-abhorrence. 

These  torments,  consisting  largely  of  negative  properties,  indicat- 
ing the  soul's  terrible  realization  of  its  failure,  its  loss  and  its 
disgrace,  are  called  natural  punishments,  since  by  the  connection 
and  force  of  natural  law  they  follow  inevitably,  without  any  interven- 
tion on  the  part  of  a  personal  judge  or  a  direct  infliction  of  penalty. 
They  are  the  necessary  results,  the  certain  harvest,*  the  full  devel- 

*Gal.  vi.  7,  8. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  669 

opment  of  sin.  But  there  are,  besides,  punishments  that  have  no 
necessary,  at  least  no  apparent  or  immediate  connection  with  men's 
sins — positive,  judicial  punitive  inflictions,  which  God  will  visit  upon 
transgressors  apart  from  the  natural  consequences  of  their  deeds. 
Even  on  this  side  of  the  final  assize,  instances  of  such  special  visita- 
tions of  judgment  are  constantly  witnessed.*  The  consignment  of 
the  wicked  to  a  place  of  torment  belongs  properly  to  this  category. 
The  judicial  action  of  conscience  belongs  in  part  to  the  natural,  in  part 
to  the  positive  punishments  of  sin.  A  representative  and  an  execu- 
tioner of  the  Supreme  Judge  holds  his  court  and  draws  his  sword 
in  the  very  bosom  of  the  soul,  recalling  all  its  long-forgotten  oppor- 
tunities, its  stifled  convictions,  its  disingenuous  procrastinations,  its 
insidious  hatred  of  God  and  its  hideous  selfishness.  Such  activity  of 
conscience  can  even  here  render  life  insupportable,  and  drive  men 
into  self-execration,  as  witness  the  case  of  Cain  and  Judas  and  thous- 
ands of  others. t  What  will  be  its  power  when  all  masks  are  torn 
off,  all  disguises  and  devices  are  taken  away,  and  men  must  hear  its 
inexorable  demands.  We  need  not  discuss  the  question  of  mater- 
ial or  physical  flames,  \yhen  we  ponder  the  fire  which  the  recollec- 
tion of  our  wrong-doing  kindles  and  keeps  burning  in  the  soul,  a  fire 
forever  supplying  its  own  fuel.  The  white  heat  of  the  furnace, 
heated  seven  times  more  than  it  was  wont,  would  be  a  solace  com- 
pared with  the  unquenchable  rage  of  remorse  when  the  soul  once 
comes  to  a  full  realization  of  its  unholy  relation  to  God,  and  the  full 
consciousness  of  its  being  forever  incapable  of  effecting  any  change. 
The  revelation  of  God's  wrath  is  not  merely  another  form  of  divine 
mercy.     It  is  a  consuming  fire. 

This  indestructible  organ  which  God  has  set  as  his  vicar  in  the 
soul,  impressing  upon  man  the  guilt  of  sin  and  making  him  own  the 
justness  of  its  punishment,  suggests  also  the  inference  that  hell  like 
heaven  has  its  grades  of  woe,  determined  according  to  different  in- 
dividuals and  also  in  the  same  individual  according  to  the  different 
stages  of  his  further  progression  in  sin.  But  the  imagination  recoils 
from  the  thought  of  men  going  on  indefinitely  multipl}'ing  their 
sins,  and  thus  ever  increasing  their  wretchedness,  although  in  this 
life  sin  becomes  the  punishment  of  sin,  and  from  various  analogies 


*  Judges  i.  7.     Note  the   histories   of  Jacob,   David,    Haman,  The    Flood, 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  The  Jews,  etc.,  etc. 
f  Is.  Ivii.  !;  Matt.  xiv.  2;  Gen.  xlii.  21  f. 


670  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  conclusion   is   irresistible   that  the  condition  which  men   carry 
with  them  into  hell  will  be  subject  to  illimitable  progression. 

The  sinner,  furthermore,  will  be  not  only  self-judged  and  self  pun- 
ished but  he  will  be  condemned  of  God,  the  absolute  judge  of  the 
living  and  the  dead.  Immediately,  by  his  own  judicial  act,  by  a 
distinct  personal  revelation  of  his  wrath,  will  he  smite  his  enemies. 
The  direct  punitive  judgment  of  God  is  the  supreme  import  of  future 
retribution.  It  is  not  mercy  that  confines  sinners  to  hell,  nor  is  the 
soul  condemned  and  subjected  to  ineffable  pains  and  torments  for 
the  sake  of  its  own  amendment.  The  life  of  probation  God  fixed  in 
this  world,  the  life  of  retribution  he  has  fixed  in  the  next.  Nor  do 
we  adequately  interpret  the  attribute  of  infinite  justice  by  holding 
that  the  condemned  are  incarcerated  or  put  under  these  dismal 
restraints  simply  for  the  protection  of  others  and  for  the  moral 
good  of  the  universe.  Men  are  assigned  to  the  realm  prepared 
for  the  devil  and  his  angels  because  that  is  the  fit  place  for  them,* 
because  they  have  deserved  such  an  award,  because  they  have 
wickedly,  incorrigibly  offended  against  God,  because  God  hates  sin 
and  is  angry  with  the  wicked,  because  God  is  just  and  can  not  deny 
himself 

These  torments  the  confessors  declare  are  to  continue  forever, 
"Sine  fine  crucientur,"  a  doctrine  already  propounded  in  Art. 
II.  In  this  declaration,  as  in  all  the  others  of  this  Article,  the 
Confession  re-affirms  the  faith  of  the  Church  Universal  from  the  days 
of  the  apostles.  Frightful  as  is  the  prospect  of  unspeakable,  irre- 
mediable, everlasting  woe,  there  is  no  doctrine  on  which  the  creed  of 
the  Church  has  been  more  explicit,  unanimous  and  unwavering  than 

this.f 

The  universality  of  the  Church's  consensus  on  this  doctrine, 
induces  of  itself  the  conclusion  that  it  is  explicitly  taught  in  the 
Scriptures,  a  conclusion  which  an  examination  of  the  divine  oracles 
unquestionably  confirms.  It  is  in  fact  a  common  charge  of  the  most 
intelligent  opponents  of  the  Bible  that  it  teaches  the  doctrine  of 
eternal  misery.  The  terms  employed  to  designate  and  describe  the 
world  of  woe  signify  unmistakably  the  idea  of  duration  without  end. 
The  crucial  word  aiuvio-  receives  from  all  the  standard  Greek  lexi- 

*  Prov.  .xi.  21  ;  Num.  xxiii.  19. 

t  For  an  admirable  summary  of  the  historic  belief  in  eternal  punishment  see 
Reimensnyder's  "  Doom  Eternal." 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  671 

cographers  the  interpretation  of  duration  without  end,  perpetual, 
never-ceasing,  eternal,  ev^erlasting,  for  ever.  The  term  occurs 
seventy-one  times  in  the  New  Testament,  there  being  in  no  instance 
any  proof  or  probability  of  it  implying  limited  duration.  It  is  applied 
to  the  absolute  God,  to  the  permanence  of  his  kingdom,  to  the  per- 
petuity of  the  Gospel,  to  the  blessedness  of  the  saints.  A  parallel 
of  the  latter  with  the  misery  of  the  damned  is  drawn  in  the  same 
passage  and  expressed  by  the  same  term,  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  out 
of  the  question  to  assign  the  idea  of  eternity  to  the  one  and  of  lim- 
ited duration  to  the  other.*  Eternal  pain  and  eternal  life  are  set 
over  against  each  other.  "The  absolute  idea  of  eternity  in  regard  to 
the  punishment  of  hell  is  not  to  be  got  rid  of  by  a  toning  down  of 
the  word  aiunog,  but  is  to  be  regarded  as  exegetically  established  in 
this  passage  by  the  opposed  i;u//v  aiuviav."'f  The  Scriptures  admit  of 
nobther  deduction  than  that  the  sentence  of  the  damned  is  irreversi- 
ble and  its  enforcement  absolutely  interminable. J  And  in  propor- 
tion as  men  repudiate  this  doctrine  they  are  found  qualifying  their 
submission  to  the  Bible  as  an  infallible  and  authoritative  standard  of 
faith  and  life. 

Though  staggering  under  its  contemplation,  reason  offers  no  valid 
objections  to  this  doctrine  of  Revelation.  The  idea  of  the  infinite 
perpetuity  of  personal  suffering  may  at  first  sight  seem  inconsistent 
with  the  fathomless  mercy  of  God,  yet  no  grounds  can  be  urged 
against  it  which  might  not  be  offered  with  equal  force  against  the 
existence  of  evil  and  suffering  in  the  present  world.  Not  the  end- 
less duration  of  evil,  but  the  origin  of  it  under  the  reign  of  infinite 
goodness,  is  the  appalling  problem  of  the  universe.  Archbishop 
Whateley  agreed  to  "  undertake  to  explain  to  any  one  the  final  con- 
demnation of  the  wicked,  if  he  will  explain  the  existence  of  the 
wicked. "§  If  the  presence  of  sin  and  pain  are  not  incompatible  with 
the  divine  benevolence  in  this  world,  how  can  their  endless  continu- 
ance be  inconsistent  with  it?  If  sin  and  suffering  are  so  connected 
here  that  they  who  are  guilty  of  the  former  cannot  possibly  escape 
the  latter,  notwithstanding  repentance,  pardon  and  reformation,  what 
hope  is  there  that  any  will  cease  from  suffering  as  long  as  they  con- 

*Matt.  XXV.  46,  cf.  41. 

t  Meyer  in  loco.  Matt.  iii.  12,  xviii.  8,  cf.  -pogKaipa,  2  Cor.  iv.  18, 

X  Luke  xvi.  26  ;  Rev.  xiv.  1 1,  xxii.  1 1,  I\Iatt.  xii.  32. 

g  "  Future  State." 


672  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tinue  in  sin,  and  what  is  to  keep  men  from  sinning  in  the  reahn  of 
the  damned,  when  no  divine  or  human  restraints  could  deter  them 
from  evil-doing  here?  For  it  is  not  the  infliction  of  eternal  pains 
for  temporal  sins  that  confronts  us,  but,  in  the  first  place,  the  incura- 
bility of  a  condition  brought  about  by  man's  own  guilt,  and  secondly, 
the  confirmed  hopelessness  of  that  condition  in  the  future  world  by 
the  sinner's  inexorable  continuance  in  his  opposition  to  God's  will. 
Non  cessante  peccato  nequit  cessare  poena. 

Nor  can  it  be  shown  that  this  awful  doctrine  is  irreconcilable  with 
any  of  the  divine  perfections.  We  can  only  judge  of  the  divine 
attributes  and  of  what  is  compatible  with  them  by  the  revelation  of 
their  exercise  in  the  past.  It  did  not  seem  good  to  supreme  wis- 
dom to  interpose  against  the  entrance  of  evil  into  the  world,  but 
angels  and  men  were  suffered  to  fall  and  to  incur  dire  penalties. 
Whence  then  arises  any  presumption  that  the  immutable  Judge  is 
likely  by  a  sovereign  act  of  his  will  to  put  an  end  to  evil  in  the 
hereafter?  If  it  is  proper  in  his  sight  to  destroy  it,  why  not  destroy 
it  now?  Had  good  men  this  power  they  would  probably  exercise 
it  at  once.  An  earthly  father  would,  if  it  were  possible,  keep  out  or 
put  out  evil  from  his  house.  God  does  not.  Man's  notions,  man's 
ways,  especially  the  desires  of  guilty  souls,  are  no  standard  for  him. 
We  admit  in  other  things  the  incomprehensibility  of  his  doings,  so 
reason  also  here  properly  bows  before  the  inscrutable  judgment  of 
God.* 

So  far  as  it  raises  opposition  to  this  doctrine  it  is  always  upon 
premises  that  are  unsound  and  incompatible  with  the  facts.  It 
underestimates  the  fearful  import  of  sin,  and  along  with  that  error 
disparages  the  inflexible  righteousness  of  God.  It  overlooks  the 
infinite  hatred  of  evil  which  must  dwell  in  the  heart  of  the  Holy 
One.  It  fails  to  recognize  that  the  violation  of  God's  law  involves 
a  degree  of  guilt  for  which  we  have  no  measurement.  Nor  do  the 
objections  raised  against  eternal  punishment  take  into  account  the 
transcendent  glory  and  inconceivable  cost  of  the  salvation  freely 
offered  to  sinners,  and  the  absolute  culpability  of  its  contemptuous 
rejection.  These  facts  rightly  considered,  can  anything  short  of 
endless  retribution,  the  abiding  wrath  of  God,  be  deemed  an  ade- 
quate punishment?  Would  anything  short  of  this  do  justice  to  the 
unutterable  seriousness  of  impenitent  obduracy?  Surely  souls  can- 
*  Gen.  xviii.  25  ;  Job  xi.  7  ;  Rom.  xi.  33  f. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  Gj^) 

not  for  ever  palter  with  the  holiness  of  God,  nor  spurn  for  ever  that 
grace  which  while  it  cannot  be  exhausted  can  just  as  little  be 
mocked. 

But  may  not  the  lost  be  ultimately  recovered  to  God?  Will  not 
those  excruciating^  torments  crush  their  hard  and  stubborn  will? 
Will  not  the  terrific  realization  of  their  guilt  and  wretchedness  force 
from  the  most  intractable  the  cry  for  mercy?  Suffering  is  not  pro- 
verbial for  such  effects  in  this  life.  It  hardened  Pharaoh  instead  of 
subduing  him.  The  most  bitter  experiences  have  little  power  to  re- 
strain wickedness.  Burning  regrets  are  rarely  of  any  avail  in  effect- 
ing reformation  or  drawing  men  to  God.  Terror  has  never  trans- 
formed a  fiend  into  a  saint.  The  culprit  respited  on  the  gallows  has 
seldom  distinguished  himself  b}"  a  career  of  morality  and  obedience 
to  law.  Men  indeed  are  not  saved  by  punishment,  but  by  divine 
grace.  The  Gospel  of  wretchedness,  "the  basement  Gospel  under 
the  world  and  after  the  grave"  is  not  likely  to  effect  salvation  where 
the  message  of  peace  and  good  will  has  failed.  Suffering,  so  far 
from  moving  the  mind  to  decision,  really  disqualifies  it,  and  even 
disposes  men  to  blaspheme  the  God  of  heaven  for  their  wretched- 
ness.* 

"  Pain  is  force,  necessity,  a  grinding  stress  of  absolutism,  which 
may  do  something  in  breaking  down  a  will,  but  never  was  known 
to  lift  up  a  will  out  of  weakness  and  evil,  or  ennoble  it  in  the  liberty 
and  free  ascension  of  good.  Breaking  down  a  will  too,  let  it  be  ob- 
served, is  not  conversion,  but  catastrophe,  death — just  what  is  the 
undergirding  import  and  reality  of  the  second  death."  f  Thus 
viewed  p.sychologically  hell  is  the  last  place  where  one  could  look 
for  genuine  contrition  and  conversion,  and  when  viewed  soteriologi- 
cally  there  arises  not  the  shadow  of  a  hope  that  God  will  there 
graciously  and  effectually  interpose  for  salvation.  Certainly  no 
stronger  considerations  can  be  offered  than  are  now  offered  to 
effect  the  sinner's  restoration  to  God.  As  we  cannot  conceive  of 
more  forcible  appeals  either  to  men's  hopes  or  fears,  to  their  reason, 
their  heart  and  their  conscience,  than  such  as  are  being  constantly 
enforced  upon  them  now,  so  neither  can  we  entertain  the  thought 
that  God  may  have  in  reserve  some  more  potent  saving  agency 
than  those  now  acting  upon  men's  minds,  some  extraordinary  de- 

*  Rev.  xvii.  1 1. 

t  Bushnell,  Sermons  on  Living  Subjects,  "A  single  trial  better  than  many." 


674  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

vice  that  can  span  the  now  impassable  gulf  which  yawns  between 
the  lake  of  fire  and  the  river  of  life. 

The  divine  resources  for  salvation  may  not  be  exhausted,  yet  if 
there  are  more  effective  methods  we  must  ask  why  God  does  not 
employ  them  now?  Every  hope  of  salvation  beyond  the  grave  dis- 
credits the  plan  of  salvation  now  in  force.  It  says  in  effect  that 
God  is  not  doing  the  best  for  us  now — that  man  is  not  alone  re- 
sponsible if  he  dies  unredeemed.  It  disparages  the  present  means  of 
grace.  Man  can  do  better  in  the  next  world,  more  efficacious  reme- 
dies await  the  sinner  there.  It  is  better  to  die  in  your  sins,  for  the 
saving  forces  in  hell  make  salvation  there  absolutely  certain.  But 
even  granted  that  more  powerful  incitements  coming  from  without 
should  combine  with  the  woeful  experiences  of  the  lost  to  effect  a 
moral  change,  all  inward  conditions  for  such  a  result  will  be  want- 
ing. Man  will  be  a  moral  bankrupt.  Those  higher  sensibilities 
which  in  life  offered  a  basis  for  the  action  of  divine  grace,  will  have 
been  consumed  by  long  continuance  in  sin.  The  nobler  affinities 
are  burnt  out.  Death,  the  second  death,  has  quenched  the  last 
sparks  on  which  a  new  life  might  have  been  kindled. 

Condemned  sinners  will  not  begin  that  world  where  they  began 
this,  with  boundless  capacity  for  moral  growth  ;  but  that  sphere  of 
existence  will  open  where  this  one  closes,  with  all  the  better  endow- 
ments blasted,  squandered,  extinguished.  It  is  the  nature  of  moral 
character  to  become  more  and  more  fixed  and  unchangeable  the 
longer  men  continue  in  a  certain  course.  What  was  once  depend- 
ent on  choice  becomes  gradually  as  firm  and  unalterable  as  fate. 
The  elements  of  good  accordingly,  which  exercised  at  the  proper 
time,  might  have  developed  into  righteous  living,  will  through  un- 
holy indifference  and  moral  violence  lose  all  vitality  and  therefore  all 
possibility  of  action.  Hence,  though  Christ  were  again  to  be  of- 
fered in  hell,  even  crucified  afresh,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  should  be 
there  to  apply  redemption  to  the  lost,  their  spiritual  exhaustion 
must  render  them  incapable  of  its  acceptance. 

Must  then  divine  love  ultimately  confess  itself  defeated  by  the 
obduracy  of  the  sinner?  Will  it  not  as  a  last  resort  have  recourse 
to  omnipotence  and  by  resistless  force  rescue  men  from  eternal  sin 
and  suffering  ?  This  would  still  more  manifestly  defeat  the  eternal 
purpose  of  love  in  the  creation  and  the  redemption  of  individual  per- 
sonal  beings.     That  purpose  can  have  contemplated  nothing  less 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  675 

than  their  everlasting  blessedness  in  the  love  and  fellowship  of  God. 
Such  blessedness  is  however  impossible  without  holiness,*  and  holi- 
ness cannot  be  forced  upon  a  free  creature  without  or  against  his  own 
^vill — not  even  by  Omnipotence.  Blessed  unholiness  and  enforced 
sanctification  are  alike  unthinkable.  Blessedness  and  holiness  have 
their  province  in  the  sphere  of  moral  freedom  and  personality.  The 
annihilation  of  this  freedom,  the  crushing  out  of  man's  personality, 
cannot  be  the  ultimate  design  of  the  love  that  gave  him  being,  that 
hung  bleeding  for  him  on  Calvary.  That  is  more  clearly  irreconcil- 
able with  it  than  eternal  damnation. f 

The  Scripture  passages  sometimes  cited  in  defence  of  restoration- 
ism ;};  have  reference  either  to  the  universality  of  grace  in  its  provis- 
ion, or  they  relate  to  the  totality  of  those  who  are  God's  children 
and  who  become  such  subjectively  through  faith  ;§  or  they  point  to 
the  universality  of  the  homage  and  honor  which  both  friend  and  foe 
will  at  last  render  to  God.  And  if  after  this  explanation  there  still 
remain  in  single  and  mysterious  utterances  unsolved  difficulties, 
their  proper  interpretation  cannot  be  in  conflict  with  the  clear  and 
oft  repeated  declarations  of  the  Lord  and  his  apostles. 

The  concrete  cases  of  damnation  brought  to  our  view  give  no 
support  to  the  theory  of  restoration.  Not  a  gleam  of  hope  nor  a  ray 
of  repentance  is  discernible  in  the  rich  man  in  hell,  and  although  the 
fallen  angels  tremble  and  writhe  in  pain  they  continue  still  to  be 
devils. II  The  present  life  is  decisive  forever.  Time  is  the  season  of 
testing  and  of  grace.  Eternity  is  the  state  of  fixedness  and  destiny. 
It  may  seem  hard  that  no  second  trial  is  to  be  allowed,  but  the 
severity  of  the  case  does  not  alter  its  truth,  though  it  does  give  infi- 
nite importance  to  the  present  life.  Nor  is  it  quite  impossible  to 
demonstrate  that  a  second  probation,  were  it  even  attainable,  is  not 
at  all  desirable.  The  world's  experience  shows  that  too  much  trial 
diminishes  rather  that  increases  the  chances  of  a  good  result,  that 
one  trial  is  better  than  many.  God  clearly  gives  men  only  one 
chance  for  this  life,  the  period  of  youth.     Failure  in  that  is  final  in 

*Heb.  xii.  14. 

t  Thomasius,  Christi  Person  u.  Werk. 

J  Acts  iii.  21  ;  Rom.  v.  18  f,  xi.  32  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  21,  22,  28  ;  Phil.  ii.  10  f;  Rev. 
V.  13,  14- 

^Juhii  iii.  16,  36;  Gal.  iii.  22. 

II  James  ii.  19. 


6']6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

its  decision  for  every  one.  Thus  he  gives  them  one  chance  for  eter- 
nity, and  when  the  result  of  this  shall  be  revealed  it  will  be  found  a 
finality.* 

Finally,  it  has  been  proposed  to  replace  this  horrible  doctrine  of 
the  infinity  of  suffering  by  the  ultimate  annihilation  of  the  wicked. 
The  life  forces  must  finally  be  so  worn  out  by  their  unrelenting 
opposition  to  God  and  the  inexorable  continuance  and  effect  of  their 
sufferings,  that  being  itself  will  at  last  be  dissolved  and  sink  away 
into  the  void  abyss  of  non-existence.  Under  the  terrible  annealing 
of  ages,  the  vital  principle  advances  to  absolute  extinction. 

Such  a  doctrine,  if  the  destructibility  of  personal  spiritual  being  is 
at  all  conceivable,  is  doubtless  less  repulsive  and  frightful  to  man 
than  the  idea  of  an  absolutely  interminable  continuance  of  evil  and 
suffering;  but  its  greater  attractiveness  does  not  render  it  more  prob- 
able. The  apparent  simplicity  of  this  solution  of  the  world-problem 
awakens  an  involuntary  suspicion.  It  makes  no  account  of  the  eter- 
nal perfections  and  purposes  of  God  which  are  here  the  determining 
element.  Such  annihilation  would  be  a  boon  to  the  damned  suffer- 
ers. The  prospect  of  such  an  escape  from  their  punishment  would 
be  ineffable  solace  to  their  weary  anguish.  It  is  the  very  relief 
which  according  to  Scripture,  the  wicked  sigh  for  in  their  torments. f 
They  would  thus  escape  from  the  hand  of  an  offended  God  and  from 
the  grip  of  divine  justice.  They  would  after  all  get  the  better  of  the 
divine  government,  like  the  condemned  murderer  who  through 
suicide  bids  defiance  to  the  power  that  holds  him  in  its  grasp  and 
is  about  to  execute  its  penalties. 

It  is  not  the  province  of  man's  moral  freedom  to  choose  between 
existence  and  non-existence,  but  in  that  existence,  which  is  God's 
creation,  to  make  his  choice  between  life  and  death,  between  the  nor- 
mal elevation  of  his  being  to  communion  with  God  in  glory  and 
virtue,  or  its  degradation  to  infinite  guilt  and  woe  as  the  negative 
result  of  having  missed  the  end  of  his  being. 

Hell,  then,  is  not  the  realm  of  hope,  but  the  prison  of  despair. 
As  revelation  throws  not  a  ray  of  mercy  into  this  outer  darkness,  so 
reason  also  has  discovered  no  way  of  escape.  It  is  the  blackness  of 
darkness  forever.     If  the  mind  recoils  from  such  a  doctrine,  let  it  be 

*This  subject  is  forcibly  treated  in  Bushnell's  sermon  "  A  single  trial  better 
than  many." 
fRev.  vi.  i6. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  677 

remembered  that  men  sin  from  choice,  and  persist  in  their  choice 
despite  the  voice  of  Sinai  and  the  groans  of  Calvary.  Ut  Deus  non 
est  causa  peccati,  ita  etiam  non  est  causa  damnationis,  sed  unica 
causa  damnationis  est  peccatum.* 

II.  What  the  Confessors  Condemn. 

I.  "They  condemn  the  Anabaptists,  who  teach  that  the  punish- 
ment of  damned  men  and  devils  will  have  an  end."  They  mean  to 
be  understood  upon  this  point  of  endless  woe  following  unrepented 
sin.  So  convinced  were  they  of  this  truth,  and  so  alive  to  the  subtle 
and  specious  attempts  to  exclude  it  from  the  Scriptures,  that,  not 
content  with  its  thetical  statement  here  and  in  Article  II,  they  sol- 
emnly repeat  it  in  its  antithetical  form,  and  put  their  anathema  upon 
the  Anabaptist  fanatics  who  were  then  spreading  the  heresy  that  the 
pains  of  hell  will  cease,  and  with  whom  to  their  abhorrence  the  Re- 
formers, upon  their  arrival  at  Augsburg,  discovered  that  Eck  was 
confounding  them  on  this  point.  In  harmony  with  the  oecumenical 
faith  of  the  Church,  the  Reformers  believed  the  judgment  of  the 
Parousia  to  be  a  finality,  a  fixed,  irrevocable,  eternal  separation  be- 
tween the  good  and  evil.  The  sentence  of  the  Judge  they  viewed 
as  a  terminus  pcremptorius  for  human  probation,  the  utmost  limit 
beyond  which  change  and  conversion,  grace  and  opportunity,  are  no 
longer  possible. 

It  was  the  misconception  of  this  truth  that  underlay  Origen's  the- 
ory of  restoration.  The  unconverted,  he  held,  passed  from  one 
world  into  another,  as  from  one  school  to  another,  until  their  conver- 
sion by  these  repeated  trials  is  finally  attained.  This  involves  "an 
unlimited  and  illimitable  series  of  worlds  and  of  world  develop- 
ments," but  such  a  view  conflicts  with  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the 
Parousia  as  absolutely  decisive,  conclusive  and  final,  so  that  "after  it 
no  mention  can  be  made  of  history  and  historical  progress,  but  only 
of  life  and  existence  in  a  fixed  and  undisturbed  eternity."t     That 

*  Form.  Cone.  For  an  interesting  exhibit  of  the  apparent  contradictions  on 
this  subject,  both  in  Scripture  and  in  human  thought,  see  Martensen,  ^^283- 
289.  Theological  considerations,  he  holds,  point  to  the  doctrine  of  uhimate 
universal  salvation  ;  Anthropological  premises  to  the  dark  goal  of  eternal 
damnation.  This  supposed  antinomy  he  pronounces  the  crux  of  thought, 
which  it  is  impossible  for  the  Church  to  solve  while  she  remains  in  the  stream 
of  lime  and  the  course  of  development. 

f  Martensen. 

44 


678  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

this  Origenistic  heresy  *  was  a  favorite  tenet  of  leading  Anabaptists 
is  a  well-attested  historical  fact.  They  reasoned,  not  from  the 
Scriptures  but  from  their  conceptions  of  God,  that  the  damned,  in- 
cluding Satan  and  his  angels,  will  ultimately  have  salvation.  God, 
who  is  love,  cannot  be  otherwise  than  gracious  even  in  his  wrath. 
He  must  at  last  show  mercy  to  all,  and  the  punishments  he  imposes 
can  only  be  designed  as  means  to  ultimate  reformation. f  Christ 
may  not  be  able  to  save  them,  it  was  taught,  but  he  will  assign  them 
to  the  Father  who  is  the  everlasting  fire,  (!)  the  consuming  fire. 
He  can  and  will  save  the  devil  and  you  together.  And  further^ 
whoever  is  with  God  is  saved.  But  nothing  can  be  forever  separ- 
ated from  God,  hence  all  the  dam.ned  and  devils  must  finally  come 
to  God  and  be  saved. 

Such  teachings  are  entirely  consistent  with  the  general  character 
of  this  monstrous  Anabaptist  fanaticism.  Along  with  their  Socinian 
tendencies  on  the  Trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ,  and  their  Pela- 
gian extenuation  of  the  essential  nature  of  sin,  their  speculations  on 
future  retribution  come  directly  into  conflict  with  both  the  Christian 
consciousness  and  the  explicit  declarations  of  Scripture. | 

2.  "They  condemn  also  others  who  are  now  disseminating  the 
Judaizing  notions  that  anterior  to  the  resurrection,  the  righteous 
will  possess  the  government  of  the  world,  the  wicked  being  every- 
where destroyed." 

That  this  second  damnant  is  likewise  aimed  at  the  Anabaptists 
is  clear  from  historical  data  Their  infernal  theocracy  of  blood  and 
lust  had,  it  is  true,  not  yet  been  set  up  at  Miinster,  but  to  the  keen 
eye  of  the  Reformers  it  was  evident  whither  such  madness  was  drift- 
ing. Even  before  the  arrival  of  the  Zwickau  prophets  at  Witten- 
berg in  1 52 1,  Carlstadt  had  been  agitating  a  new  theocracy  to  be 
established  by  force.  He  was  accordingly  ready  for  the  revelations 
which  had  been  vouchsafed  to  the  Zwickauers,  requiring  the  over- 
throw of  the  whole  existing  order  of  things,  the  destruction  of  the 
wicked  princes  then  reigning  and  the  enthronement  of  the  saints  in 
their  place,  with  the  supreme  power  reserved  to  Storch,  who  under 
the  pretence  of  a  divine  commission  chose  twelve  apostles  and  twenty- 
two   disciples  for  his  theocratic  court. §     Somewhat  later  tli^  noto- 

*The  Variata  substitutes  Origenistas  for  Anabaptistas. 

fHeberle,  Stud,  u.  Krit.,  1851,  pp.  817  ff,  827. 

X  Plitt,  Einleitung,  II.,  418,  419.  \  Dorner,  Prot.  Theol.  I.,  132  f. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  679 

rious  Miinzer  had  gone  into  Thuringia,  there  with  his  sword  of 
Gideon  to  organize  upon  the  ruins  of  church  and  state,  Christ's 
visible  kingdom  upon  earth — a  kingdom  based  upon  equaUty  and 
communism,  and  composed  exclusively  of  saints,  who  being  under 
divine  inspiration  have  no  need  of  government  by  the  magistracy. 
The  saints  alone,  it  was  maintained,  have  a  true  right  in  property, 
and  these  Anabaptists  were  the  saints.  To  unbelievers  nothing  is 
due  but  judgment.  Civil  rulers,  unless  they  belong  to  the  elect, 
possess  no  authority.  They  must  join  the  prophet's  covenant  or  be 
slain,  for  he  was  chosen  and  inspired  to  set  up  the  kingdom  of  God 
on  earth,  and  obedience  to  him  in  the  destruction  of  the  non-elect 
is  their  first  duty.  This  is  the  work  of  the  angels  in  the  day  of 
judgment,  but  by  the  angels  is  to  be  understood  God's  messengers, 
and  by  the  day  of  judgment  the  present  crisis.  The  wicked  are 
now  to  be  hurled  from  their  seats  of  power,  and  the  humble,  the 
pious,  to  be   exalted  in  their  place. 

"These  thoughts  of  destruction  may  be  summed  up  in  this,  that 
Miinzer  seeks  to  annihilate  all  the  principles  of  human  order  which 
belong  to  the  first  creation,  in  order  to  set  in  its  place  a  second  cre- 
ation, pretendedly  divine,  but  in  reality  murderous."*  In  this  judg- 
ment which  under  the  lead  of  these  inspired  prophets  is  to  uproot 
the  wicked,  the  elect  only  are  to  be  spared.  And  these  will  hence- 
forth enjoy  a  blissful  existence  upon  earth,  life  without  law,  procre- 
ation without  marriage,  holy  offspring  without  sinful  carnal  lusts, 
a  reign  of  sublime  voluptuousness,  in  which  God's  holy  and  perfect 
children  no  longer  require  the  Scriptures. f  All  is  external,  worldly, 
sensuous.  This  reign  of  the  saints  is  in  the  sphere  of  natural  life. 
"Anterior  to  the  resurrection"  they  are  to  be  relieved  from  the  cross 
and  tribulation,  and  to  ride  proudly  and  victoriously  through  the 
world,  which  everywhere  lays  its  carnal  treasures  and  pleasures  at 
their  feet. 

The  second  error  condemned  had  accordingly  sprung  up  from 
the  same  rank  soil  as  the  first.  These  lawless  fanatics  were  under- 
mining civil  government  as  well  as  Christian  doctrine.  They  radi- 
cally opposed  all  natural  human  ordinances,  and  aimed  at  supplant- 
ing them  with  theocratic  institutions.  Only  the  exclusively  divine 
shall  prevail  from  henceforth,  and  whatever  is  not  in  harmony  with 
this  must  be  extirpated  by  the  avenging  sword  of  these  saints,  who 

*  Dorncr  I.,  138.  f  Menius.     Quoted  in  Plitt's  Einleitung. 


68o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

alone  constitute  the  true  Church,  the  divine  kingdom.  Such  teach- 
ings and  their  practical  and  bloody  inauguration  by  the  usurpation 
of  political  power  were  "eagerly  seized  upon  by  the  enemies  of  the 
Reformation  as  so  many  proofs  that  it  taught  men  to  reject  all  au- 
thority, and  thus  incited  to  disobedience  and  rebellion  against  the 
temporal  as  well  as  the  spiritual  powers."* 

To  be  held  responsible  for  all  the  madness  and  anarchy  which 
these  revolutionists  had  spread  like  a  prairie  fire  throughout  Ger- 
many, was  one  of  the  severest  trials  to  which  the  Reformation  was 
subjected.  Its  supporters  could  not,  therefore,  in  all  wisdom  and 
dut}^,  fail,  when  before  the  bar  of  the  empire,  to  disavow  the  revolt- 
ing and  seditious  tenets  with  which,  under  the  insidious  and  diabol- 
ical plea  of  direct  inspiration,  these  men  threatened  the  overthrow 
of  all  civil  and  social  order.  Hence,  immediately  upon  the  con- 
demnation of  their  error  regarding  the  period  after  the  judgment, 
they  denounce  their  no  less  dangerous  error  relative  to  the  period 
pleceding  the  judgment  of  the  last  day. 

The  language  of  the  Variata  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  aim  of 
this  second  dainnant.  During  the  ten  years  which  intervened  be- 
tween the  presentation  of  the  Confession  and  the  date  of  the 
Variata,  the  Chiliastic  dreams  of  the  Anabaptists  had  developed  the 
most  hideous  concrete  reality  at  Miinster.  There  Bockeldson  had 
been  proclaimed  King  of  Zion  and  Lord  of  the  whole  earth,  and 
surrounding  himself  with  a  grotesque  and  disgusting  court,  appoint- 
ing twelve  dukes  as  vicegerents  over  his  leveling  and  communistic 
kingdom,  he  had  proceeded,  by  means  of  robbery,  murder  and 
polygamy,  and  in  the  name  of  revelation,  to  affect  the  realization  of 
Christ's  predicted  reign  of  a  thousand  years.  Accordingly,  instead 
of  an  indefinite  "alios,"  Melanchthon,  in  1540,  makes  the  Confes- 
sion explicitly  "  Condemn  the  Anab.\ptists,  who  now  scatter  Jewish 
opinions,  and  imagine  that  before  the  resurrection,"  etc.  *  *  "For 
we  know  that,  since  the  godly  ought  to  obey  the  magistrates  that 
now  are,  they  must  not  seize  their  power  from  them  or  overthrow 
governments  by  sedition,  because  Paul  enjoineth:  'Let  every  soul 
be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers'  (Rom.  xiii.  i).  We  know  also 
that  the  Church  in  this  life  is  subject  to  the  cross,  and  shall  not  be 
glorified  until  after  this  life.  *  *  Therefore,  we  utterly  condemn 
and  detest  the  folly  and  diabolical  madness  of  the  Anabaptists. "f 

*Gieseler,  N.  Y.  Ed.,  Vol.  IV.,  1 12-122. 

t  See  also  Melancthon's  De  furor,  et  delir.  Anabapt.,  and  Luther  on  Ps.  xc. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  68  r 

The  error  condemned  possesses,  therefore,  an  unmistakable  char- 
acter, clearly  defined  by  the  clause  in  the  German  text:  "Judaizing 
notions,  which  are  even  now  mooted,''  and  externally  illustrated  by 
the  terrible  events  of  contemporaneous  history.  The  times  in 
which  this  condemnation  was  uttered  are  decisive  of  its  intent  and 
application.  The  grammatico-historical  method  is  the  only  safe  and 
honest  means  for  the  interpretation  of  the  Confession,  as  well  as  of 
the  Bible,  and  that  method  reveals  very  distinctly  the  true  inward- 
ness of  the  "  Jewish  opinions"  repudiated  by  the  Confessors.  That 
this  repudiation  was  intended  as  a  club  for  smiting  all  who  find 
Millennarian  prophecies  in  the  Bible,  will  hardly  be  maintained  by 
any  who  have  carefully  examined  the  language  employed  by  the 
Confession  and  who  have  studied  the  history  of  the  times  which 
produced  it.  "The  Confession  itself  owes  its  establishment  and  de- 
velopment entirely  to  circumstances  of  a  practical  and  historic 
nature."* 

These  teachings  are  called  "Judaizing  notions"  because  they  par- 
take of  the  general  character  of  the  Jewish  anticipations  of  a  secu- 
lar kingdom,  consisting  of  and  ruled  by  God's  people.  They  con- 
found the  political  sovereignty  of  this  world  with  God's  spiritual 
and  eternal  kingdom.  A  state,  in  the  form  of  a  theocracy,  governed 
by  direct  revelation,  is  to  take  the  place  of  a  civil  polity.  The 
saints  are  to  rule,  regmim  niundi  occupaturi  sint,  to  enjoy,  under 
Christ,  political  sovereignty  and  a  reign  of  vulgar  power,  sensuous 
glory  and  voluptuous  indulgence,  from  the  day  of  judgment  then  at 
hand  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

The  Anabaptist  leaders  are  known  likewise  to  have  stood  in  close 
connection  with  the  Jews,  to  have  pursued  Hebrew  studies  under 
them,  and  to  have  been  inoculated  by  them  with  unsoundness  on  the 
Church's  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  It  is  claimed,  too,  that  in  the 
midst  of  the  commotions  of  that  age,  the  Jews  were  quite  active  in 
expressing  among  the  excited  masses  their  own  hopes  of  future  tri- 
umph, and  of  the  government  of  the  world  under  their  Messianic 
king.  It  is  therefore  altogether  probable  that  the  Anabaptists 
largely  imbibed  from  these  their  materialistic,  carnal  conceptions  of 
the  millennial  reign.  They  recognized  too  by  their  interpretations 
of  Scripture  that  Israel  still  remained  God's  people,  and  that  a  glor- 

*  Cf.  Judgment  of  the  Dorpat  Faculty,  Evang.  Review,  Vol.  XIX.,  p.  236, 

250  f. 


682  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ious  future  awaited  them,  and  they  accordingly,  unlike  the  Re- 
formers, labored  zealously  for  their  conversion  ere  the  imminent 
close  of  the  dispensation  of  grace.  It  was  doubtless  also  their  study 
of  the  Old  Testament,  for  which  the  more  fanatical  Anabaptists  had 
a  special  predilection,  that  moulded  in  great  part  their  conceptions 
of  the  character  of  this  new  era  about  to  be  ushered  in.  They  are 
credited  with  no  small  measure  of  ability  in  the  investigation  of  the 
prophetic  Scriptures.  "  Hetzer,  Cellarius,  and  Denk  would  be  en- 
titled to  great  honor  for  their  studies  of  the  prophets  had  they  not 
been  led,  by  their  delusive  premises,  from  one  misconception  to  an- 
other. Their  minds,  pre-occupied  with  the  expectation  of  a  sensu- 
ous, visible  kingdom  over  which  they  and  their  kind  were  to  rule, 
the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  had  of  course  to  be  harmonized  with 
their  prepossessions,  and  thus  even  made  to  conftrm  their  error.* 

III.  What  they  Committed  to  Individual  Freedom  and  Future 

Elucidation. 
It  is  not  the  design  of  Confessions  to  exhaust  the  contents  of 
revelation,  or  to  present  a  finished  code  of  doctrine.  Their  subject 
matter  does  not  properly  consist  in  speculative  opinions  nor  in  doc- 
trinal problems  that  lie  remote  from  the  centre  of  revelation,  but  in 
the  obvious  saving  truths  of  the  Gospel,  to  the  acknowledgment 
of  which  the  Church  has  been  brought  By  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
which  she  holds  as  clearly  and  firmly  established.  The  creed  is  the 
landmark  of  truth  which  the  Church  has  at  any  stage  fully  attained, 
the  declaration  of  what  accords  with  her  experience  and  what  is  es- 
sential to  her  life,  along  with  the  refutation  of  such  errors  as  have 
arisen  in  opposition  to  her  faith.  "  The  Confessions  only  present  to 
the  light  of  day  the  contest  *  *  *  through  which  every 
Christian  heart  is  passing."  f  Practical  and  historical  issues  consti- 
tute the  true  Confessional  sphere.^  The  Confessors  rightly  distin- 
guished between  the  assured  faith  of  the  Church  and  a  system  of 
theology.  Their  personal  absorption  in  the  practical  interests  of 
salvation  gave  them  indeed  peculiar  qualifications  for  drawing  up  a 
Confession,  which  is  the  most  perfect  embodiment  of  the  saving 
truths  of  the  Gospel  ever  put  forth.     What  they  had  fully  received 

*Plitt,  Einleitung.  f  Dr.  Jacobs,  Luth.  Quarterly,  Vol.  XI.  p.  20. 

JSee  the  Prefaces  to  Augs.  Conf.,  Smal.  Art.  and  Form.  Cone,  and   Rudel- 
bach,  Einleitung,  114. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  683 

they  have  as  fully  given,  but  they  did  not  propose  to  "  perplex  con- 
sciences with  inexplicable  labyrinths,"*  nor  to  exempt  the  Church 
after  them  from  zealously  searching  for  the  treasures  of  truth  yet  to 
be  drawn  from  God's  holy  word. 

In  view  of  all  the  circumstances  of  the  time,  it  may  be  regarded  as 
providential  that  the  Confessors  ventured  no  further  in  the  defini- 
tion of  eschatological  doctrines.  Prof  Plittf  points  to  a  number  ot 
considerations  which  reveal  to  what  extent  they  were  incapacitated 
for  the  confessional  presentation  of  correct  and  complete  views  in 
this  sphere.  He  even  suggests  that  their  attempts  to  advance  be- 
yond the  limits  they  observed,  might  have  subsequently  imposed 
upon  the  Church  the  necessity  of  convicting  the  Confession  of  error. 

Engrossed  by  the  momentous  practical  concerns  of  the  hour,  they 
gave  little  attention  to  the  historic  evolution  of  redemption  up  to  its 
culmination  in  Christ,  and  showed  as  little  appreciation  of  that 
course  of  its  development  which  was  still  to  be  experienced.  They 
made  it  their  supreme  task  to  recall  the  Church  to  the  personal 
appropriation  of  the  salvation  already  accomplished  and  completed  in 
Christ.  Their  vision  of  the  future  was  in  fact  obscured  by  their  belief 
that  the  last  times  were  at  hand,  that  anti- Christ  had  already  appeared 
in  the  papacy,  and  that  the  judgment  was  imminent,  while  their 
sense  of  historical  development  was  wholly  blunted  by  the  anomalous 
condition  of  the  Romish  hierarchy.  Luther,  furthermore,  ques- 
tioned the  canonicity  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  actually  disparaged 
prophecy  in  general,  holding  it  as  ministering  to  inordinate  curiosity 
more  than  to  saving  faith.  Again,  with  all  their  advance  in  scien- 
tific exegesis,  the  Reformers  were  still  somewhat  fettered  by  the 
allegorical  method  which  spiritualizes  all  sensuous  reality  and 
thereby  dissipates  all  history.  Finally,  Luther  himself  entertained 
a  singular  and  ever-growing  aversion  to  the  Jews,  holding  them  to 
be  forever  cast  off  and  therefore  beyond  the  prospect  of  ever  again 
holding  a  place  in  the  history  of  redemption.  A  passage  in  one  of 
his  Church  Postils  declares,  indeed,  that  the  words  of  Scripture  con- 
cerning Israel's  conversion  have  not  yet  been  fulfilled,  yet  it  is  well 
known  that  he  generally  regarded  these  prophecies  as  fulfilled  in 
the  spiritual  Israel.  This  doubtless  accounts  for  the  omission  of  the 
above  passage  in  editions  of  the  Church  Postils  after  his  death. 
Under  such  circumstances  a  proper  insight  into  the  historic  stages 

*  Melanch.  to  Brentz.  f  Einleitung,  II.,  415-417. 


684  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  the  final  consummation  was  out  of  the  question,  and  the  Con- 
fession, like  the  oecumenical  creeds  and  all  the  subsequent  Lutheran 
symbols,  is  restricted  to  that  outline  of  the  events  and  purposes  of 
the  Parousia,  which  are  most  clearly  and  unmistakably  attested  by 
the  Scriptures.  This  suffices  for  the  faith  of  the  Church,  but  it  does 
not  exhaust  the  contents  of  revelation  on  the  NovissiMA. 

Among  the  non-confessional  doctrines  which  are  involved  in  our 
Article  but  left  as  open  questions ;  may  be  mentioned : 

1 .  TJie  duration  of  the  day  of  judgment. 

2.  The  conversion  of  Israel. 

3 .  The  tzv 0-fold  resurrection. 

4.  The  viilletiniuni. 

I.  The  answer  to  the  first  furnishes  in  great  part  the  key  for  the 
solution  of  the  other  remote  and  profound  problems.  Does  the 
judgment  follow  instantaneously  upon  the  Parousia,  and  are  all  its 
tremendous  occurrences  to  coincide  in  a  single  scene?  Is  the  final 
consummation  to  be  compassed  within  an  ordinary  day,  the  universal 
transition  from  time  to  eternity  to  be  effected  suddenly,  by  one 
momentary  stroke?  Or  is  the  day  of  judgment,  like  a  prophetic 
day  or  a  creative  aeon,  an  extended,  indefinite  period,  as  interpreted 
already  by  Augustine,*  a  day  embracing  a  progressive  series,  a  vast 
reach  of  successive  scenes  separated  from  each  other  by  wide  unde- 
fined intervals? 

If  the  dogmaticians  are  correct  in  representing  the  second  advent, 
the  general  resurrection,  the  final  judgment  and  the  end  of  the 
world  "  as  immediately  united,"  succeeding  each  other  "  without  an 
interval  of  time,"t  then  it  follows  inevitably  that  from  the  moment 
of  our  Lord's  appearance  the  roll  of  ages  will  have  ceased  and  all 
earthly  creature  development  will  have  issued  in  a  fixed  eternity. 
And  if  they  have  any  Scripture  warrant  for  this  assumption,  their 
conclusion  that  "before  the  completion  of  the  judgment  no  earthly 
kingdom,  and  life  abounding,  etc.,  etc.,  is  to  be  expected,"  becomes 
of  course  irrefutable. 

But  what  if  there  be  ,yp'5vo<  ku\  Kaipol  embraced  in  that  momentous 
day  ?     Is  it  not  the  predominant  purport  of  our  Lord's  second  com- 

*  "  Ultimam  diem,  i.  e.  novissimum  tempus,"  De  Civ.  Dei,  XX.  I,  Hagen- 
bach,  Hist.  Doct.,  Vol..  I.,  374. 

tQuenstedt,  IV.,  649.     Mel.  Loci  de  regno  Chrlsti,  Gerhard  XX.,  iio  ff. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  685 

ing  to  occupy  his  realm,  to  perfect  his  kingdom,  and  to  consummate 
his  reign?  His  Parousia  most  obviously  "includes  the  idea  of  a 
permanent  abiding  from  that  coming  onwards."*  Nor  dare  we  for- 
get, as  the  last  stage  of  God's  kingdom  breaks  into  view,  that  every 
other  stage  has  beeen  characterized  by  the  law  of  extended  develop- 
ment. We  have  no  ground  for  supposing  that  this  principle  of  the 
divine  action  will  be  abandoned  until  the  very  last  act  of  the  last 
scene  shall  have  been  reached,  when  the  Son  shall  have  subdued  all 
things  and  God  will  be  all  in  all.f  To  the  vision  of  faith  these 
events  of  the  future  may  appear  as  one  mighty,  complex  scene,  all 
comprehended  in  a  single,  awful  catastrophe,  which  marks  the  transi- 
tion from  the  temporal  to  the  eternal.  They  are  events  as  intimately 
related  to  each  other  as  they  are  in  character  distinct  from  all  that 
preceded  them,  and  at  first  view  the  Scriptures  may  seem  so  to  group 
them  as  if  they  constituted  one  definitive  tableau  of  human  history. 
Yet  this  does  not  preclude  their  occurrence  in  the  form  of  prolonged 
series  and  successive  stages.  The  method  pursued  by  the  prophets, 
alike  in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  the  New,  offers  here  a  most  in- 
structive guide.  They  employ  uniformly  a  perspective  by  which 
great  events  which  in  point  of  time  are  widely  separated  are  drawn 
into  one  field  of  view.  Overlooking  intermediate  points  which  do 
not  affect  the  general  prospect,  they  present  in  one  vast  reach  of 
vision  the  successive  phenomena  which  stretch  over  unmeasured 
ages.  It  is  thus  that  the  first  and  the  second  advents  of  the  Lord, 
the  Incarnation  and  the  Parousia,  salvation  and  judgment,  are  in  the 
Old  Testament  continually  blended  into  one  scene.  The  Scribes 
were  led  into  their  prodigious  error  respecting  the  Messianic  king- 
dom, by  their  failure  to  recognize  this  prophetic  principle  and  the 
fact  of  intervening  stages.  They  could  discover  no  signs  of  the 
overwhelming  triumph  and  glory  which,  according  to  the  prophets, 
were  to  signalize  the  advent  of  Zion's  king.  Our  Lord  in  his 
prophecies  uses  the  same  perspective,  so  uniting  the  scene  of  the 
final  judgment  with  the  near  prospect  of  the  overthrow  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  rapid  progress  of  his  kingdom  upon  its  ruins,  that  even  yet 
exegesis  has  great  perplexity  in  separating  what  applies  peculiarly 
to  the  destruction  of  his  Jewish  enemies,  and  what  is  reserved  for 
fulfilment  in  the  eventual  destruction  of  the  world. 

What  prophecy  groups  into  a  single  scene  like  a  range  of,  distant 

*  Ewald.  f  I  Cor.  xv.  26-28. 


686  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

mountains,  history  unfolds  as  a  succession  of  events  ividely  removed 
from  each  other.  The  recognition  of  this  inspired  method  gives  the 
true  interpretation  of  those  great  prophecies  whose  fulfilment  re- 
mains to  be  realized.  To  sweep  all  these  mighty  occurrences  of  the 
final  era  into  the  brief  compass  of  a  single  day  is  to  make  a  very 
summary,  not  to  say  a  profane,  disposal  of  them.  We  have  not  so 
learned  the  Scriptures.  Dazzling  as  is  the  light  reflected  from  that 
resplendent  day,  the  cross-lights  of  the  past  falling  upon  it  enable 
us  to  distinguish  in  some  degree  the  individual  objects,  and  to  point 
out  their  progressive  unfoldings.  The  coming  of  the  Lord  consti- 
tutes a  dispensation.  "  In  the  Gospel-Apostolic  description  of  one 
day  of  judgment  there  is  collectively  and  plastically  comprehended 
that  which  extends  through  different  periods  and  phases."*  What 
ages  may  be  embraced  in  that  aeonic  day,  or  by  what  chronometer 
they  shall  be  reckoned,  remains*  unrevealed.  Yet  in  analogy  with 
every  other  day,  it  will  have  its  morn  and  its  eve.  It  will  be  ushered 
in  with  the  Parousia  of  the  Lord  for  the  triumphant  establishment 
of  his  kingdom,  it  will  close  with  the  delivering  of  the  kingdom  to 
the  Father.  We  distinguish  between  the  preliminary  goal  and  the 
ultimate  goal  of  history.  Certainly  the  glorious  assumption  of  the 
kingdom  and  its  surrrender  to  the  Father  are  two  distinct  acts,  with 
an  interval  of  undefined  duration  between  them. 

2.  Tlie  conversion  of  Israel  falls  within  the  purview  of  this  article, 
although  passed  over  in  silence  by  the  Confessors,  who  with  harsh 
prejudices  against  the  Jews  recognized  no  place  for  them  in  the 
Church's  future. 

Some  of  the  dogmaticians  held  that  their  general  conversion 
would  take  place  before  the  judgment,  or  about  the  time  of  the  Pa- 
rousia, but  by  the  great  majority  this  hope  is  rejected. f  We  can- 
not so  venerate  these  great  teachers  as  to  place  them  above  the 
Scriptures.  As  certainly  as  the  gifts  and  calling  of  God  are  without 
repentance  J  the  conversion  of  Israel,  as  a  people,  is  an  event  that 
must  yet  come,  an  event  which  is  destined  to  secure  for  them  again 
that  glorious  ascendency  in  redemptive  history  and  in  redeemed 
humanity,  to  which  they  were  from  the  beginning  ordained. §] 

The  Church  which  is  to  compass  the  conversion   of  all  nations 

*  Van  Oosterzee,  Ps.  xc.  4 ;  2  Peter  iii.  8. 

t  With  what  logic  and  exegesis  !     See  Schmid.  659. 

J  Rom.  xi.  29.  \  Matt.  xix.  28,  30;  Rev.  vii.  1-8,  9. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  687 

will  not  ultimately  fail  with  that  favored  people  to  whom  the  glad 
tidings  were  first  given.  Rejected  by  their  kinsmen,  the  Apostles 
turned  away  to  the  Gentiles;  yet  they  continued  to  abound  in  prayer 
and  hope  for  their  salvation,*  and  explicitly  predicted  their  eventual 
submission  to  the  King  whom  they  had  pierced. 

Not  as  sporadic  individuals,  but  as  a  body  shall  they  be  saved. f 
Their  glorious  restoration  will  be  coe.\tensive  with  their  blindness, 
their  pardon  will  be  commensurate  with  their  unbelief  "All  Israel 
shall  be  saved"  is  the  language  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  who 
so  far  from  cherishing  their  delusive  hopes  in  regard  to  a  national 
Messiah  and  their  exclusive  relations  to  him,  periled  his  life  in  op- 
posing this  error.  Blindness  in  part  has  indeed  happened  unto  Is- 
rael, but  not  forever — only  till  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come 
in.  Then  will  the  Deliverer  appear  to  turn  away  ungodliness  from 
Jacob. I  Scattered,  peeled  and  persecuted  for  ages,  their  house  is 
not  to  be  forever  desolate.  Jerusalem,  the  centre  and  type  of  their 
hopes,  is  not  to  be  evermore  trodden  under  the  feet  of  the  nations, 
but  only  until  the  time  of  the  nations  be  fulfilled.  Then,  after  the 
TTlr/pufia  of  the  Gentiles,  who  received  the  Gospel  earlier  because  of  its 
rejection  by  the  chosen  people,  their  day  will  have  come,  their  times 
of  refreshing  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord.§  All  these  predictions 
indicate  the  close  connection  between  the  conversion  of  Israel  and 
the  coming  of  the  Lord.  The  preliminary  condition  of  Israel's  sal- 
vation is,  according  to  both  Christ  and  Paul,  the  relatively  com- 
pleted work  of  the  Gospel  among  the  nations,  which  in  turn  is  uni- 
formly represented  as  a  sign  of  the  end.  Their  sins  will  be  blotted 
out,  and  their  refreshing  from  the  Lord  will  take  place  at  the  reap- 
pearance among  them  of  Jesus  Christ,  whom  the  heavens  have  in  the 
meanwhile  received  until  the  times  of  restitution. ||  They  shall  not 
see  him  until  they  welcome  him  coming  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.^ 
Thus,  as  with  every  other  great  error,  a  profound  truth  underlies  the 
delusion  which  has  so  long  misled  the  Jews.  The  error  intermin- 
gled with  the  truth  was  shared  in  part  by  the  most  enlightened  Jews 
who  formed  the  innermost  circle  of  the  disciples.  Even  on  the  sum- 
mit of  Olivet  they  ask  the  risen  Lord  once  more  whether  now  Israel 


*Rom.  X.  II.  f  Rom.  xi.  29.  32.  J  Rom.  xi.  25  f. 

§  Matt,  xxiii.  39;  Luk.  xxi.  24;  Acts  ill.  19-21. 

II  Acts  iii.  21.  TJMatt.  xxiii.  39. 


AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

is  to  have  its  true  place  in  the  kingdom,  and  to  realize  its  divinely 
kindled  hopes.  And  the  reply,  let  it  be  remembered,  is  not  a  re- 
proof of  such  expectations  in  point  of  fact.  It  merely  dispels  their 
notions  in  regard  to  the  time  fixed  for  the  restoration  of  the  king- 
dom to  Israel. 

A  most  striking  confirmation  of  these  prospects  is  found  in  the 
marvelous  preservation  of  that  nation,  remaining  united  in  its  uni- 
versal dispersion,  holding  to-day  the  foremost  place  in  many  of  the 
higher  walks  of  life,  and  still  in  a  measure  as  of  old  distinguished  by 
the  most  solid  virtues.  While  conversely,  these  prospects  opened 
up  to  us  in  revelation,  constitute  the  only  solution  to  the  problem 
of  the  Jewish  nation,  the  most  remarkable  in  the  world's  history. 
They  make  known  "  the  glorious  end  for  which  this  people  has 
been  through  so  many  successive  ages  preserved  as  by  miracle, 
and  kept  distinct  from  all  other  nations." 

3.  The  ttvo-fold  resurrection.  The  prophetic  day  inaugurated  by 
the  coming  of  the  Lord  includes  the  period  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead.  It  is  on  the  last  day  that  the  dead  will  be  raised.  Of  the 
"dead  in  Christ"  it  is  explicitl}'-  testified  that  they  shall  rise  imme- 
diately upon  the  advent.  * 

According  to  the  popular  and  traditional  idea,  which  our  dogma- 
ticians  also  stoutly  maintain,  the  resurrection  of  all  the  dead  will  be 
simultaneous,  the  saints  and  the  wicked  will  rise  together.  This 
theory  has  neither  Scripture  nor  analogy  for  its  support.  Their  con- 
dition separating  the  two  divisions  by  an  impassable  gulf,  what 
grounds  exist  for  the  expectation  that  their  resurrection  will  coin- 
cide in  time?  The  perspective  of  prophecy  may  seem  to  group 
them  together  in  one  field  of  vision,  but  as  noted  above,  this  is  done 
in  the  case  of  events  widely  different  and  occurring  at  long  intervals. 
Prophecy  appears  to  view  every  future  catastrophe  as  the  final  goal, 
and  it  ordinarily  recognizes  no  distinction  and  no  differences  of  time 
between  events  which  in  their  import  and  occurrence  are  remote 
from  each  other.  In  respect  of  the  resurrection,  however,  it  clearly 
foreshadows  a  chronological  order,  a  succession  of  events  separated 
by  an  undefined  interval.  When  St.  Paulf  adduces  the  resurrection 
of  Christ  in  proof  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  brings  into 
connection  with  the  latter  the  end  as  signalized  by  his  giving  up  the 
kingdom  to  God  the  Father,  he   declares  that   these  events   are  to 


*  John  vi.  40,  54;  xi.  26;  i  Thess.  iv.  13-16.  f  i  Cor.  xv.  23  f. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment,  689 

happen  successively,  each  in  its  own  order,  ev  rc^ipUj  Tayfian.  The  first 
rdyiia  is  the  resurrection  of  Christ  as  anapxv,  the  second,  frra-a,  the 
resurrection  of  those  that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming,  two  events  not 
only  distinct  from  each  other  but  separated  by  an  interval  of  ages. 
Then,  ena,  comes  the  third  rdyfia,  the  end.  This  ultimate  event  must 
accordingly  be  removed  in  point  of  time  from  the  resurrection  of 
those  that  are  Christ's,  whose  rising  coincides  with  the  Parousia. 
And  inasmuch  as  long  intermediate  ages  separate  Christ's  resurrec- 
tion from  that  of  his  saints,  the  parallel  drawn  b}'  the  apostle  requires 
a  similar  interval  between  the  second  and  the  third  events.  The  last 
coincides  with  the  final  goal,  the  second  synchronizes  with  the  pre- 
hminary  goal. 

Let  it  be  noted,  too,  that  in  this  classic  chapter  on  the  resurrec- 
tion, the  awakening  of  the  wicked  is  not  even  alluded  to.  Again, 
Paul  expresses  his  deep  concern  to  have  part  in  the  resurrection,*  a 
solicitude  altogether  meaningless  and  superfluous  if  he  had  the  con- 
viction that  absolutely  all  would  rise  together.  Finally,  our  Lord's 
allusion  to  "the  resurrection  of  the  just"  f  clearly  points  to  and  con- 
firms this  doctrine  of  a  two-fold  rising.  The  hieroglyphical  utter- 
ances of  the  Apocalypse  I  accordingly  do  not  constitute  a  new  or 
unique  chapter  in  inspiration,  by  their  distinction  of  the  resurrection 
of  those  who  are  removed  beyond  the  power  of  the  second  death, 
from  the  subsequent  universal  resurrection.  Pauline  and  Johannean 
theology  are  in  entire  accord  here,  both  having  gained  their  key- 
note from  the  Lord  himself§ 

4.  The  millennial  rcigJi.  That  the  Church  is  to  have  a  period  of 
great  triumph  before  the  world's  final  course  is  run,  is  one  of  the 
clearest  deductions  from  Holy  Scripture,  and  one  of  the  profoundest 
convictions  of  the  Christian  consciousness.  While  this  hope  has 
in  its  Jewish  and  sensuous  forms  stimulated  all  manner  of  extrava- 
gances and  fanaticism,  rendering  the  very  name  chiliasm  to  many  a 
term  of  derision,  yet  hidden  under  this  gross  and  many-colored  shell 
there  is  doubtless  imbedded,  "  a  real  pearl  of  Christian  truth  and 
knowledge,"  1|  the  pledge  of  a  sublime  inheritance. 

*  Phil.  iii.  II,  21.  fLukexiv.  14.  JRev.  x.x.  4,  5,  12  ff. 

§0n  the  support  which  the  doctrine  of  a  twofold  resurrecUon  derives  from 
the  distinction  between  the  expressions  avaaraaiq  ruv  vinpun'  and  av.  zk  t>sKpuv, 
Matt.  xvii.  8  ;  Mk.  ix.  g,  10,  xii.  25;  Luke  xx.  35  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  12,  20,  etc.  etc. 
See  Olshausen's  Comment.,  Vol.  ii.  183. 

II  Lange. 


690  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  Lutheran  Church  rejects  the  chihasm  crassns  which  exhibited 
its  grossest  forms  during  the  Reformation,  yet  she  has  never  failed 
to  recognize  the  idea  which  underhes  chiliasm,  "  the  idea  of  a  pre- 
eminentl}'  blooming  time  for  the  Church  before  the  final  consumma- 
tion."* The  dogmaticians,  notwithstanding  their  repudiation  of 
manifold  forms  which  this  doctrine  has  assumed,  had  yet  to  attempt 
some  solution  of  the  thousand  years,  and  making  them  arithmeti- 
cally literal  they  presented  the  extraordinary  theory  that  the  millen- 
nium extended  from  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great,  when  the 
persecutions  ceased,  to"  the  year  1300,  about  which  time  Satan  being 
again  released  aroused  the  Ottoman  family,  under  which  Gog  and 
Magog,  i.  e.  the  Turkish  Empire,  acquired  the  greatest  strength  and 
■  the  Saracen  race  raged  against  the  Church  with  a  greater  effort  than 
before,  etc."t  Surely  when  the  pillars  of  Lutheran  orthodoxy  thus 
infringe  Art.  XVII.  which  condemns  such  as  place  the  millennial 
period  before  the  resurrection,  those  who  hope  for  a  glorious  visible 
reign  of  Christ  and  his  saints  after  the  resurrection,  cannot  be 
charged  with  transgressing  the  bounds  of  the  Confession. 

But  if  the  dogmaticians  must  be  followed  as  the  infallible 
expounders  of  the  Lutheran  Symbols,  let  any  one  receive  the  con- 
fessional doctrine  that  the  Papacy  is  Anti-Christ,  and  put  under- 
neath it  their  theory  of  the  millennium  extending  from  the  fourth  to 
the  fourteenth  century,  during  which  period  the  papacy  attained  the 
height  of  its  power.  If  from  this  combination  of  reformers  and 
dogmaticians  it  follows  inevitably  that  the  millenium  represents  the 
thousand  years'  reign,  not  of  Christ,  but  of  Anti-Christ,  the  dilemma 
will  afford  a  sovereign  test  of  men's  capacity  for  swallowing  camels. 
Apart  from  the  numerous  prophecies  both  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testaments,!  a  glorious  manifestation  and  triumph  of  the  Church 
upon  earth  is  to  be  looked  for  on  internal  grounds.  The  highest 
good,  the  eternally  beautiful,  the  essentially  true,  must  yet  have 
their  proper  recognition  in  a  world  where  they  have  so  long  been 
despised.  The  fitness  of  things  demands  that  the  "via  crucis"  of 
redeemed  humanit}^  shall  eventually  shine  as  the  "via  lucis,"  that 
the  crown  of  thorns  shall  be  replaced  by  the  royal  diadem  on  the 
Church's    brow.     The    loftiest   idea   of   Christianity   must  have  its 

*  Martensen.  f  So  Gerhard,  cf.  Schmid,  661  f. 

J  Isa.  ii.,  vi.-ix.,  xxxv.,  Ix.,  Ixv.;  MaU.  xix.  28;  2  Tim.  ii.  12;   Rev.  ii.  26,  iii. 
21,  V.  10. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  691 

crowning  realization.  The  kingdom  of  God  does  indeed,  as  a  spir- 
itual power,  even  now  achieve  its  invisible  triumphs;  but  while  God's 
doings  are  invisible  and  spiritual  in  their  origin,  the  process  pro- 
gresses from  within  outward  and  the  end  is  external  embodiment. 
Following  in  the  steps  of  her  Lord,  the  Church  now  treads  the  path 
of  suffering,  weakness  and  shame,  sharing  the  afflictions  of  Christ, 
that  she  may  also  share  his  triumph  at  last  and  have  her  glorious 
apocah'psc  along  with  his  appearance  in  glory.*  Risen  and  trans- 
figured with  her  Lord,  she  will  then  exercise  power  and  display 
dominion  over  the  earth  in  another  sense  than  is  true  of  her  career 
at  present,  and  that,  according  to  revelation,  for  a  thousand  years. f 
These  figures  are  doubtless  not  to  be  interpreted  with  mathematical 
literalness,  as  if  the  divine  chronometer  were  based  upon  the  same 
scale  with  ours,|  Those  numerical  limits  of  the  triumph  rather  indi- 
cate that  this  period  falls  within  the  sphere  of  earthly  development 
and  not  within  the  confines  of  eternity.  It  lies  this  side  the  defini- 
tive goal. 

"The  millennium  is  a  period  of  transition.  The  longest  night  is 
over,  but  still  the  full  day  has  not  yet  come."§  It  corresponds  with 
the  intermediate  state  of  the  believer,  whose  individual  experience 
represents  the  career  of  the  aggregate  organism.  Between  the  pre- 
liminary goal  of  his  personal  earthly  life  and  the  final  goal  of  eternal 
perfection,  there  intervenes  a  transitional  state  of  blessedness.  So, 
too,  the  whole  body,  of  which  he  is  a  member,  is  to  celebrate  a 
glorified  state  intermediate  between  the  period  of  conflict  and  the 
eternal  glor\'.  In  the  case  of  the  believer  such  a  condition  of  pre- 
liminary blessedness  is  not  disputed — why  should  it  be  for  the  total- 
ity of  believers,  the  Church?  In  the  former  case  experience  reflects 
its  unerring  light,  the  sainted  spirit  awaiting  the  resurrection;  in  the 
latter  we  are  left  solely  to  the  pages  of  prophetic  revelation,  which  in 
the  nature  of  the  case  are  difficult  of  interpretation  prior  to  the 
actual  fulfilment.  A  yet  more  striking  and  unmistakable  t\-pe  of 
the  Church's  transitional  glory  whilst  yet  in  her  earthly,  temporal 
sphere,  is  given  in  that  mysterious  portion  of  the  life  of  her  Head 
between  the  resurrection  and  the  ascension.  In  that  half-heavenly, 
half  earthly  period,  heaven  and  earth  being  so  closely  joined  that  it 
forms  a  proper  part  neither  of  the  state  of  humiliation  nor  of  exalta- 

*  Phil.  iii.  10  ;  Col.  i.  24  ;  i  John  iii.  1,2.  f  Rev.  xx. 

t  Ps.  xc  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  8.  ^  Van  Oosterzee. 


692  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tion,  the  Church  has  the  mirror  of  her  own  transfigured  state  after 
the  resurrection  unto  Hfe — Calvary  behind  her,  OHvet  immediately 
before,  without  having  yet  ascended  from  its  summit,  "  the  period  of 
transition  from  earthly  existence  to  heavenly  glory." 

Immediately  upon  the  revelation  of  the  Lord,  as  already  noted, 
will  be  witnessed  on  the  one  hand  the  destruction  of  embodied  and 
personal  evil,  the  binding  of  Satan,  who  has  the  power  of  death,  and 
on  the  other  the  absolute  release  of  the  saints  who  had  fallen  vic- 
tims to  his  power.  But  these  two  events,  which  are  the  instantan- 
eous results  of  the  Parousia  and  which  are  correlative  and  neces- 
sarily take  place  in  immediate  connection  with  each  other,  do  not 
complete  the  scene.  As  the  whole  Church  partakes  of  the  afflictions 
of  Christ,  so  the  whole  Church  must  share  in  the  revelation  of  his 
glory.  Hence,  simultaneously  with  the  resurrection  of  those  who 
had  departed  in  Christ,  will  occur  the  like  transformation  of  those 
still  living  in  the  faith  of  Jesus  and  awaiting  his  return.*  And  as  the 
Church,  both  in  its  living  and  its  dead,  is  thus  transfigured,  a  like 
glorification  must  overtake  the  seat  of  her  existence. f  Yet  all  this 
does  not  imply  the  absolute  destruction  of  evil.  A  spiritu-corporeal 
kingdom,  perfected  and  visibly  ruled  by  the  glorified  Mediator,  suc- 
ceeds the  Church  militant,  but  "  the  world  outside  of  its  domain  is 
not  at  once  changed.  That  part  of  the  race  not  incorporated  with 
the  true  Church  has  not  been  rescued  from  the  sway  of  sin  and 
death,  although  it  has  been  brought  immediately  under  the  influ- 
ence of  the  glorified  Church  and  made  to  recognize  the  universal 
authority  of  the  Lord."  The  power  of  evil  has  indeed  been  broken, 
its  forces  repressed,  its  personal  principle  and  centre  bound.|  but  the 
binding  of  Satan  does  not  indicate  that  sin  in  the  unrepentant  world 
has  suddenly  reached  its  termination.  This  serves  only  as  a  pledge 
that  it  is  no  longer  under  the  inspiration  and  direction  of  a  personal 
chief,  no  longer  an  organized  power,  and  that  it  can  accordingly  no 
longer  oppose  any  barrier  to  the  triumphant  realization  of  Christ's 
kingdom.  The  enemies  are  driven  back,  but  not  yet  destroyed; 
disarmed,  but  not  dead.  Yea,  prophecy  discloses  yet  one  more  en- 
counter. A  single  verse,  but  of  unmistakable  clearness,  points  to 
Satan's  release  in  connection  with  the  issue  of  the  millennial  reign. § 

*  I  Thess.  iv.  15;   i  Cor.  xv.  51  ff.;  2  Cor.  v.  4. 

fSo  Von  Hofman,  Luthardt  and  others,  even  Thomasius. 

X  Rev.  XX.  §  Rev.  xx.  7-9. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  693 

In  the  mysterious  relation  of  the  world  of  evil  to  the  empire  of 
truth,  that  unfathomable  problem  of  the  ages,  the  decisive  battle  is 
reserved  for  the  very  last  stage. 

It  is  not  from  any  accident,  not  by  breaking  through  his  prison 
walls  with  sheer  infernal  power,  but  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  di- 
vine purpose*  that  the  wicked  one  is  once  more  at  large,  mustering 
the  gigantic  concentration  of  his  remaining  forces  to  make  a  last 
desperate  onslaught  against  the  camp  of  the  saints  and  against  the 
holy  city. 

The  development  of  human  sin  in  its  relation  to  the  work  of  re- 
demption, the  persistent  rejection  by  the  unconverted  of  the  grace 
and  rule  of  Jesus  Christ,  even  when  he  reigns  gloriously  upon  the 
earth  freed  for  the  time  from  Satan's  dominion,  this  inveterate  and 
obdurate  hostility  at  once  to  the  crucified  and  the  glorified  one,  to 
grace  and  to  judgment,  will  necessarily  bring  about  a  ripeness,  an 
audacity,  a  terrible  energy  of  sin,  such  as  will  determine  its  forces  to 
stake  their  all  upon  one  desperate,  decisive  engagement. 

The  power  of  evil  in  mankind  will  thus  run  its  own  desperate 
course  and  reach  its  normal,  free,  yet  frantic  development.  Refusing 
to  be  won  by  all  the  manifestations  of  divine  grace,  judgment  and 
glory,  the  true  and  the  final  representatives  of  fallen  humanity  will 
readily,  and  with  full  consciousness  of  what  they  are  doing,  surren- 
der themselves  to  the  prince  of  darkness,  now  once  more  released, 
and  will  under  him  make  their  terrific,  hellish  onset  against  the 
Church. 

The  encounter  will  not  be  protracted.  Satan,  long  bound,  is  to 
be  loosed  only  for  a  little  season. f  The  harvest  being  ripe  and  the 
separation  between  the  wheat  and  the  tares  having  already  taken 
place,  there  is  no  longer  that  intermixture  of  good  and  evil  which 
characterized  the  field  when  the  seed  of  the  word  was  struggling 
from  one  stage  to  another  of  its  growth,  and  which  retarded  the 
complete  victory  and  prevented  the  ultimate  decision.  The  lines 
are  now  clearly  drawn.  The  forces  of  the  Lord  can  at  once,  with- 
out intermediate  agents  or  successive  contests,  proceed  to  the  up- 
rooting and  extermination  of  the  kingdom  of  darkness.  Its  last 
daring  onslaught  becomes  the  supreme  moment  of  doom.  The  de- 
velopment of  the  wicked  has  at  last  reached  its  climax  as  ordained 
of  God.     After  witnessing  the  manifest  and  most  glorious  character 


*  Aei  avTov  XvOr/vai.  \  MiKpbv  xpov6v. 

45 


694  AUGSBURG    confession: 

of  the  Church  and  her  most  palpable  union  with  her  glorified.  King 
they  march  deliberately  forward  to  compass  her  destruction.  Their 
attack  is  directed  against  the  Lord  himself,  for  they  recognize  his 
union  with  the  bride.  And  thus  they  precipitate  upon  themselves 
the  immediate  interposition  of  divine  judgment.  The  Almighty 
God,  against  whom  personally  they  aimed  their  assault  in  bearing 
down  his  Church,  now  himself  encounters  the  last  remnants  of  hos- 
tility to  his  kingdom.  There  is  no  longer  any  demand  for  inter- 
mediate human  agencies,  such  as  were  employed  in  the  long  conflict 
between  the  seed  of  the  woman  and  the  seed  of  the  serpent,  no 
longer  any  progress  of  the  contest  with  its  former  variable  fortunes, 
but  the  overwhelming  fire  falls  direct  from  God  out  of  heaven  and 
sweeps  away  the  assailing  hosts.*  Their  charge  in  solid  phalanx 
against  th.e  city  of  God  proves  their  swift  march  into  final  and  eter- 
nal doom. 

All  opposition  is  at  last  by  one  blow  annihilated,  and  the  hour  of 
judgment,  the  last  hour  on  the  clock  of  time,  signalizing  the  arrival 
of  eternity,  is  at  hand.  All  the  finally  and  obdurately  impenitent, 
those  in  their  graves  and  those  yet  alive  under  the  glorious  reign  of 
the  Christ-Redeemer,  as  well  as  the  spirits  of  darkness  reserved  in 
their  prison  to  that  hour,  receive  now  their  irrevocable  sentence. 
Every  hostile  power  is  crushed,  and  death  itself,  the  last  enemy,  is 
annihilated.  The  definitive  goal,  the  very  last  point  of  history,  is 
reached. 

The  work  of  Christ  is  complete.  Redeemed  humanit}'  has  been 
absolutely  converted  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  Perfectly  and  for- 
ever separated  from  evil,  mankind  has  in  itself  become  the  object  of 
immediate  divine  favor.f  Hence  without  ceasing  to  be  Mediator  or 
man,  yet  having  finished  his  peculiar  Messianic  work  and  executed 
his  personal  mediatorial  reign,  the  Son  now  delivers  up  the  king- 
dom to  the  Father,  to  the  infinite  hands  by  which  it  was  committed 
to  him,  that  God  henceforth  may  be  all  in  all.  X 

To  these  attempts  by  the  light  of  Holy  Scripture  to  discover  some 
definite  view  of  the  Church's  remote  future,  reason  is  ever  raising 
its  stereotyped  objection.  How  can  these  things  be?  Without  being 
always  conscious  of  the  rationalistic  unbelief  which  prompts  this 
question,  the  teachers  of  Israel  are  continually  floundering  in  the 
same  bog  with  their  renowned   prototype,  to  whom  a  second  birth 

*  Rev.  XX.  8-10.  t  John  xvi.  26,  27.  J  1  Cor.  xv.  28. 


Christ's  return  to  judgment.  695 

was  incomprehensible.  "What  a  marvellous  conception,"  says  Dr. 
Thomasius:  "a  .sainted  Church  of  God,  spirtually  and  corporeally 
perfected,  her  glorified  Lord  in  her  midst,  surrounded  by  a  hu- 
manity in  which  sin  and  death  still  remain — and  then  a  history  of 
this  Church  *  *  an  onset  of  the  assembled  nations  against  the 
holy  city  luminous  with  celestial  glory,  a  final  attack  from  Satan,  till 
at  last  fire  from  heaven  shall  devour  the  wicked  assailants  ! "  * 

Happily  no  truth  is  dependent  upon  our  capacity  of  conceiving 
or  representing  it.  And  the  certainty  of  these  things  is  assuredly 
not  overthrown  through  our  confessed  inability  of  comprehending 
them.  The  details  of  the  remote  and  momentous  period  between 
the  antecedent  and  the  final  goal  have  not  been  exposed  to  our  view, 
but  the  order  of  its  events  and  their  more  definite  outlines  here 
briefly  traced,  are  derived  by  many  of  the  ablest  and  soundest  ex- 
positors from  God's  holy  word,  and  that,  too,  in  this  age  of  unfet- 
tered and  thorough  scientific  exegesis.  Surely  the  results  of  the 
biblical  studies  of  such  scholars  as  Auberlen,  Alford,  Kling,  Lut- 
hardt,  Olshausen,  Von  Hoffman,  and  others  of  their  rank  in  the  do- 
main of  exegesis,  are  not  whiffed  away  by  a  sneer.  Theology  itself 
is  kept  from  embracing  similar  views  only  by  the  confessed  and  un- 
protestant  renunciation  of  scriptural  investigation  on  this  point. 
"The  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament,"  says  Thomasius, f  "is  yet  too 
crude,  confused  and  fluctuating  to  be  employed  in  the  structure  of 
eschatological  doctrine,  and  similarly  the  exposition  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  still  lacking  that  consensus  which  is  necessary  to  dogmatics." 

Must  then  this  whole  subject,  the  agitation  of  which  has  uni- 
formly characterized  the  most  energetic  periods  of  the  Church's 
life,  be  relegated  to  the  realm  of  agnosticism?  Is  the  Bible  in  large 
portions  of  its  most  thrilling  utterances  still  a  sealed,  not  to  say  a 
forbidden  book?  Must  the  Church  relinquish  the  idea  of  ascertain- 
ing a  definite  faith  touching  her  own  bright  consunmiation,  and  that 
simply  because  of  the  appalling  difficulties  encountered  by  the  very 
abundance  of  revelations?  Was  it  by  a  supineness  like  this  that 
she  won  and  established  her  great  fundamental  doctrines  of  Theology 
and  Soteriology?  Or  is  it  with  the  temple  of  Christian  truth  as 
with  the  unfortunate  tower  suggested  in  the  parable — the  foundations 
having  been  laid,  men  are  not  able  to  complete  its  structure?  Does 
not  providence  itself  call  the  Church  of  these  latter  days  to  bestow 

*  Christologie,  III.  464.  f  Christologie. 


696  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

her  most  intense  thought  upon  the  problems  of  the  future?  With 
its  undergirding  immovable,  its  towering  walls  impregnable,  what 
remains  for  theology,  but  to  proceed  with  the  dome  and  raise  one 
by  one  its  gilded  stories  until  they  strike  the  arches  of  the  sky  and 
complete  the  union  of  heaven  with  earth. 


ARTICI.E  XVIII. 


FREE  WILL. 

By  h.  l.  baugher,  d.  d. 


THE  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  coming  next  in  the  reg- 
ular order  in  which  the  several  articles  have  been  discussed  on 
the  Holnian  foundation,  is  the  eighteenth — "  De  Libero  Arbitrio," 
or  "  Of  Free  Will."     It  reads  as  follows: 

"  Concerning  free  will  they  teach,  that  the  human  will  possesses  some  liberty 
for  the  performance  of  civil  duties,  and  for  the  choice  of  those  things  subject  to 
reason.  But  it  does  not  possess  the  power,  without  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  of  fulfilling  the  righteousness  of  God,  or  spiritual  righteousness :  for  the 
natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  which  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God:  but  this  is 
accomplished  in  the  heart,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received  through  the  word. 
The  same  is  declared  by  Augustine  in  so  many  words:  '  We  confess  that  all 
men  have  a  free  will,  which  possesses  the  judgment  of  reason,  by  which  they 
cannot  indeed,  without  the  divine  aid,  either  begin  or  certainly  accomplish  what 
is  becoming  in  things  relating  to  God ;  but  only  in  works  of  the  present  life,  as 
well  good  as  evil.  In  good  works,  I  say,  which  arise  from  our  natural  goodness, 
such  as  to  choose  to  labor  in  the  field,  to  eat  and  drink,  to  choose  to  have  a 
friend,  to  have  clothing,  to  build  a  house,  to  take  a  wife,  to  feed  cattle,  to  learn 
various  and  useful  arts,  or  to  do  any  good  thing  relative  to  this  life  ;  all  which 
things,  however,  do  not  exist  without  the  divine  government;  yea,  they  exist 
and  begin  to  be  from  him  and  through  him.  And  in  evil  works  (men  have  a 
free  will),  such  as  to  choose  to  worship  an  idol,  to  will  to  commit  murder,  etc' 

"They  condemn  the  Pelagians,  and  others,  who  teach  that  we  are  able,  by 
the  mere  powers  of  nature,  without  the  ^d  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  love  God  above 
all  things,  and  to  do  his  commands,  as  to  the  substance  of  our  actions.  For, 
although  nature  may  be  able,  after  a  certain  manner,  to  perform  external  ac- 
tions, such  as  to  abstain  from  theft,  from  murder,  etc.,  yet  it  cannot  perform  the 
inner  motions,  such  as  the  fear  of  God,  faith  in  God,  chastity,  patience,  etc."* 

*  We  give  the  translation  found  in  the  Book  of  Worshi|).  The  original  in 
German  and  Latin  (Miiller,  Symb.  Biicher),  is  as  follows: 

697 


698  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Vom  freicn    Willcn    wird  gelehret,        De  libe?-o  arbihio  docent,  quod  hu- 

dass  der  Mensch  etlichermassen  einen  mana  voluntas  habeas  aliquam  liberta- 

freien  Willen  hat  ausserlich  ehrbar  zu  tern  ad  efficiendam  civilem  institiam  et 

leben  und  zu  vvahlen  unter  denen  Din-  deligendas  res  ration!  subjectas.      Sed 

gen,    so    die    Vernunft   begreift ;   aber  non  habet  vim  sine  Spiritu  Sancto  effi- 

ohne  Gnad,   Hilfe  und  Wirkung  des  ciendaejustitiae  Dei  seu  justitiae  spirit- 

heiligen   Geistes    vermag  der  Mensch  ualis,  quia  animalis  homo  non  percipit 

nicht   Gott  gefalHg  M^erden,  Gott  herz-  ea,   quae  sunt  Spiritus   Dei:  sed  haec 

h'ch  zu  fijrchten,  oder  zu  glauben,  oder  fit  in  cordibus,  quum  per  verbum  Spir- 

die  angeborne  bose  Lust  aus  dem  Her-  itus  Sanctus  concipitur.     Haectotidem 

zen    zu    werfen  ;    sondern   solchs   ge-  verbis  dicit  Augustinibus  lib.  III.,  Hy- 

schicht    durch     den     heiligen     Geist,  pognosticon  :     "  Esse  fatc7nur  liberum 

welcher  durch  Gottes   Wort   gegeben  arbitriimi  omnibus  hominibus,  habens 

wird.       Denn  Paulus  spricht    i    Kor.  qtddem    indicium    raiionis,    non   fer 

ii.    14.       Der  naturlic he  Mensch    ver-  quod  sit  idoniuvi  in  iis,  quae  ad  Deum 

ninimt  nichts  voni   Geist  Gottes.  pertinent,  sine   Deo  aut  inchoare  aiit 

Und    damit    man    erkennen   moge,  certe peragere,  sed  tatituni  in  operibus 

dass    hierin    kein     Neuigkeit    gelehrt  viae praesentis  tarn  bouis  qiia?n   etiam 

werd^,  so   sind  das  die    klaren    Wort  malis.     Bonis  dico,  quae  de   bono  na- 

Augustini  vom  freien  Willen,  vvie  jet-  iio'^ie  ariuntur,  id  est  velle  laborare  in 

zund   hiebei    geschrieben    aus    dem   3  agro,  7'elle  nmnducare  et  bibere,  velle 

Buch  Hypognosticon  :     "  IVir  beken-  habere  aniicuvi  voile  habere  induine7i- 

neti,  dass  in  alien  Alenschen  ein  freier  /«,   velle  fabricare    domuni,    uxoreni 

Wille  ist,  denn  sie  habenje  alle  natiir-  velle  ducere,pecora  nutrire,  artem  dis- 

lichen,  angeborncn  Verstatid  utid  Ver-  cere  diversanan   reriini  bonartwt,  vel 

nu7ift,  nicht  dass  sie  etwas  vermiige?i  quidquid  bomnn  ad  praese^itein  perti- 

tnit  Gott  zu  handeln,  als :     Gott  von  »et    vitain.       (2uae    omnia    non    sine 

Herzen  zu  lieben,  zufiirchto7i,  so7ider7t  divi7io  guber7iaciilo  subsistu7it,  i7/io  ex 

allei7i  i7i  ausserliche7i    Werke7i  dieses  ipso  et  per  ipsti7/i  su7it  et  esse  coeperu7U. 

Lebens  habe7i   sie  Freiheit  gutes  oder  Malis  vero  dico,    ut  est  velle   idolu77i 

boses  zu  wdhle7t.       Gut  niei7i  ich,  das  colere,  velle  ho77iicidiu7/i  cet." 
die  Natiir  7iermag,  als  auf  de7n  Acker        Damnant    Pelagian os   et   alios,    qui 

zu  arbeite7i  oder  7ticht,    zu   esse7i,   zu  docent,  quod  sine   Spiritu  Sancto  solis 

tri7ike7i,    zu  ei7ie77i  Freiatde  zu  gehe7i  naturae  viribus  possimus  Deum  super 

oder  7iicht,  ei7t  Kleid  a7i  oder  aitszu-  omnia   diligere,     item    praecepta    Dei 

thun,  zu  baue7i,  ei7i    VVeib  zu  7iehnie7i,  facere     quoad     substaniiam     actuum. 

ei7i    Ha7idwerk   zu    trcibc7i    und  der-  Quamquam  enim  externa  opera  aliquo 

gleiche7i  etwas  7tiitzlichs  lend  gutes  zu  niodo    efficere    natura    possit    (potest 

thu7i.      Welches  alles  doch  ohne  Gott  enim     continere     manus    a    furto,     a 

nicht  ist  7ioch  bestehet,   so7idef7i   all§s  caede),    tamen    interiores    motus    non 

aus  ih7n  tmd  durch  ih7t  ist.     Dagegen  potest  efficere,  ut  timorem    Dei,   fidu- 

ka7tn    der   Me7tsch    auch     boses     aus  ciam  erga   Deum,    castitatem,    patien- 

eigener  Wahl  fur/ieh7ne7i,  als  fur  ei/i-  tiam  cet. 
em  Abgott  7iieder  Z7i   k/iicn,  ei/i    Todt- 
schlag  zu  tliu7i,  etc.'' 


FREE    WILL,  699 

Definition. 

Although  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  Confessors  avoid  all  mere  phi- 
losophy, looking  at  the  subject  merely  from  a  religious  standpoint, 
yet  it  may  not  be  amiss  for  us,  before  entering  directly  on  a  consid- 
eration of  what  they  say  on  this,  a  pre-eminently  philosophical  sub- 
ject, to  seek  some  clear  definition  of  the  subject  itself,  even  though 
we  go  to  the  philosophers  for  it.  What  is  the  Will?  and  what  is  the 
Freedom  of  the  Will?  W'riters  on  the  Human  Mind  with  general 
consent  arrange  its  functions  into  the  threefold  division  of  The 
Intellect,  the  Sensibilities,  and  the  W^ill,  or  the  mind  knowing  or 
reasoning,  the  mind  feeling,  and  the  mind  willing.  These  are  but 
functions  or  acts  of  the  one  indivisible  mind.  The  Will  is  that  in 
man  which  is  casual  and  constitutes  more  than  anything  else  his 
personality.  He  Jias  reason  and  consciousness,  intelligence  and 
desire;  but  when  he  puts  forth  a  volition  he  declares  himself  and 
becomes  conscious  that  he  is,  and  of  what  he  is ! 

There  is  in  man  a  11a f?/re-hasis,  by  which  he  is  a  part  of  that  which 
we  call  Nature:  and  nature  is  determined  by  the  fixed  laws  that 
govern  it,  and  is,  therefore,  not  in  any  sense  free.  But  there  is  in 
man  also  a  persona/  basis,  whereby  he  is  distinguished  from  nature, 
whereby  he  knows  himself  to  be  a  moral  being,  having  in  himself  a 
power  of  causation,  which  is  free  from  outward  compulsion,  free 
from  the  fixedness  of  natural  law,  and  in  the  exercise  of  which  he  is 
conscious  of  moral  responsibility,  of  right  and  wrong. 

"  Every  man  is  conscious,"  says  Dr.  Reid,  "  of  a  power  to  determ- 
ine in  things  which  he  conceives  to  depend  upon  his  determination. 
To  this  power  we  give  the  name  of  zvi//." 

Carpenter  calls  the  Will,  "A  self-determining  power  within  us." 

Licbmann  says,  "  Will  is  the  function  of  the  Ego  by  which  it 
determines  itself  to  action." 

Bouillet  calls  it,  "The  faculty  of  willing,  of  self-determinin<T  ?" 
and  says, ."  It  differs  from  desire  and  from  the  understanding;  it  ought 
to  control  the  former,  and  receive  illumination  from  the  latter." 

Tappan  says,  "  Will  is  employed  to  express  the  casuality  of  the 
mind,"  is  "the  power  by  which  to  determine  personal  acts,"  and,  in 
view  of  its  essential  connection  with  intelligence,  calls  it  "A  power 
of  rational  self-determination." 

Many  of  you  will  recall  President  Valentine's  definition,  that 
"The  will  is  the  soul's  power  of  causality  for  choices." 


yOO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

The  very  idea  of  the  Will  involves  the  idea  of  a  certain  freedom 
or  liberty  possessed  by  it.  The  question  before  us  involves  the 
extent  of  this  liberty.  The  two  things  are  so  inseparably  connected 
as  to  be  defined  together  by  philosophers.  Thus  Kant  says, '  Every- 
thing in  nature  works  according  to  laws.  A  rational  being  alone 
has  the  faculty  of  acting  in  accordance  with  conception  of  laws, 
principles,  t.  e.  has  a  xvill.  As  reason  is  required  that  we  may 
deduce  action  from  laws,  the  will  is  nothing  more  than  practical 
reason.  If  the  will  be  in  itself  in  complete  conformity  with  reason, 
it  is  the  faculty  of  choosing  that  only  which  the  reason  recognizes 
as  good;  in  opposition  to  this,  the  determination  of  the  will  is 
necessitation.  A  perfectly  good  will  cannot  be  conceived  of  as 
necessitated  to  actions  in  conformity  with  law.  Hence,  for  the  will 
of  God,  and  for  a  holy  will  in  general,  there  can  be  no  imperatives. 
The  sJiall  is  out  of  place,  the  will  is  of  itself  in  necessary  harmony 
with  law."  Again,  he  says,  "  Will  is  that  kind  of  casuality  attributed 
to  living  agents,  in  so  far  as  they  are  possessed  of  reason;  and  free- 
dom is  such  a  property  of  that  causality  as  enables  them  to  orginate 
events  independently  of  foreign  determining  causes." 

I.  H.  Fichte  says,  "  Liberty,  in  its  highest  sense,  can  be  attributed 
to  that  only  which  is  through  itself  everything  that  it  is.  There  can 
be  nothing  freely  willed  which  does  not  in  some  degree  express  the 
essential  nature  of  liim  who  wills.  To  be  free  is  to  determine  our- 
selves ;  knowing,  feeling  and  willing  in  accordance  with  our  indivi- 
dual nature." 

K.  Ph.  Fischer  says,  "All  actual  liberty  of  the  subject  willing,  is 
a  making  of  oneself  free,  and  as  the  will  can  be  nothing  which  it  is 
not  in  itself,  this  essential  liberty  must  be  the  presupposition  of  our 
becoming  subjectively  free;  and  the  self-freeing  of  a  subject  willing, 
is  nothing  more  than  making  itself  that  for  which  it  was  created." 

Hegel  says,  "  Liberty  lies  in  the  indetermination  of  the  will ;  it 
has  in  it  no  determination  produced  by  nature;  it  has  itself  only  as 
object  and  contents;  it  refers  itself  only  to  itself;  it  is  the  faculty  of 
reflective  self-determination." 

Schelling  says,  "  Liberty  is  not  a  totally  fortuitous  occurrence  of 
actions, "nor  are  these  actions  determined  by  empirical  necessity; 
rather  it  consists  in  a  loftier  necessity,  whose  spring  is  the  essential 
nature  of  him  who  acts.  That  only  is  free  which  acts  in  accordance 
with  the  laws  of  its  own  essential  nature,  and  thus  results  of  neces- 


FREE    WILL.  701 

sity"  (/.  e.  a  necessity  of  ccrtaint)>).  "  It  is  the  faculty  of  the  good 
and  of  the  evil." 

Ulrici  says,  "  Liberty  is  the  consciousness  of  the  ability  to  decide 
differently,  to  act  differently.  The  human  will  as  the  power  of  self- 
manifestation,  self-assertion,  and  self-determination,  is  simply  the 
highest  grade  of  that  spontaneity  which  pertains  to  every  human 
being.  In  the  consciousness  of  itself  it  is  exalted  to  the  consciosness 
of  liberty.  We  impute  to  ourselves,  in  our  consciousness,  liberty 
of  willing.  The  impulses  which  operate  on  our  wills  present  them- 
selves to  our  consciousness  not  as  coercive  causes,  but  are  rendered 
motives  by  the  soul  itself  Thus  our  willing  and  acting  are  to  our 
consciousness  free." 

Zeller  says,  "  To  determine  oneself  means  that  we  have  in  our 
Self,  in  the  Ego,  in  the  personalit)' as  such,  the  ground  of  the  specific 
action  which  is  determined." 

Again,  Freedom  of  the  Will  has  been,  briefly  but  somewhat 
loosel}',  defined  to  be,  "Power  to  the  contrary." 

In  looking  over  the  many  definitions  and  statements  of  philoso- 
phers, we  are  impressed  with  the  fact  there  is,  to  say  the  least,  as 
much  difference  among  them  in  reference  to  the  same  subjects,  and 
as  much  contradiction  of  themselves  and  of  one  another,  as  ever  has 
existed  among  or  been  alleged  against  the  much  abused  theologians 
and  dogmaticians. 

Stewart  vs.  Reed  seems  to  acknowledge  that  in  certain  respects 
tlie  problem  we  are  considering  is  beyond  the  capacity  of  human 
thought,  and  to  admit  that  all  reasoning  for,  as  all  reasoning  against, 
our  liberty,  is  on  this  account  invalid. 

Yet  it  would  not  do  thus  to  dismiss  a  practical  question  of  such 
importance  that  its  determination  affects  the  whole  subject  of 
Anthropology. 

The  question  of  Free  Will  is  not  concerning  man  in  his  original 
state  before  the  fall,  nor  after  regeneration,  nor  after  the  resurrec- 
tion ;  but  only  concerning  his  fallen  state  before  regeneration.  How 
was  man's  will  affected  by  the  fall  ?  How  were  his  powers  as  a  self- 
determining  moral  agent  affected  ?  "  What  powers  in  spiritual  things 
he  has  from  himself,  since  the  fall  of  our  first  parents,  and  before 
regeneration,  and  whether,  from  his  own  powers,  before  he  has  been 
born  again  by  God's  Spirit,  he  be  able  to  dispose  and  prepare  him- 


702  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

self  for  God's  grace,  and  to  accept  or  not  the  grace  offered  through 
the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  word  and  holy  sacraments?"* 

The  History  of  the  Discussion  of  this  Question. 

During  the  first  three  centuries  after  the  closing  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment Canon,  the  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace,  in  their  more  difficult 
and  scientific  aspects  did  not  seriously  engage  the  attention  of  the 
Church.  As  a  natural  consequence  of  her  polemic  attitude  towards 
the  fatalism  of  Paganism  and  the  denial  of  responsibility  by  Gnosti- 
cism, the  anthropology  of  the  period  was  marked  by  a  strong  empha- 
sis of  the  doctrine  of  human  freedom.  This  was  particularly  mani- 
fest in  the  Alexandrian  and  Antiochian  schools,  and  became  the 
general  type  of  doctrine  for  the  Eastern  Church.  In  the  Western 
Church,  led  by  TertuUian,  Cyprian,  Hilary,  and  Ambrose,  a  contrary 
tendency  manifested  itself  and  grew,  until  the  two  opposite  predomi- 
nant tendencies  ran  into  two  great  dogmatic  divisions,  which  exist 
until  to-day.  In  respect  to  that  early  period,  they  were  known 
respectively  as  the  Greek  Anthropology  and  the  Latin  Anthro- 
pology. The  former  virtually  denied  original  sin,  made  the  fall  to 
affect  only  the  corporeal  and  sensuous  nature,  but  not  the  rational 
and  voluntary,  and  was  synergistic  in  its  view  of  regeneration.  The 
latter  held  original  sin  to  be  voluntary,  as  being  self  will,  and,  there- 
fore, a  matter  of  guilt;  that  the  Adamic  connection  relates  to  the 
entire  man,  the  voluntary  and  rational  as  well  as  the  corporeal  and 
sensuous,  and  the  will  is  corrupted  as  well  as  the  other  parts  of  his 
nature,  and  that  the  corruption  of  the  sensuous  nature  is  consequent 
upon,  and  not  antecedent  to,  the  apostasy  of  the  rational  and  volun- 
tary nature  oi  man.  The  Latin  Church  was  also  monergistic  in  its 
view  of  regeneration,  holding  the  human  will  to  be,  up  to  that  point, 
hostile  to  God,  and  therefore  not  co-operating  with  him.f 

The  Pelagian  controversy  of  the  fifth  century  furnished  occasion 
for  a  thorough  and  animated  discussion  of  the  subject  of  Free 
Will;  and,  since  the  condemnatory  clause  of  our  Article  puts  the 
Pelagians  and  those  who  may  be  classed  with  them  under  the  ban, 
we  may  as  well,  right  here,  consider  the  points  of  that  controversy, 
which  will  lead  us  to  examine  first  the  negative  side  of  the  views 
and  statement  of  the  Confessors. 

*  Form.  Cone.  Part  I.,  Chap  II. 

fCf.  Shedd's  Hist,  of  Doc,  Vol.  I.,  Chap.  IX. 


FREE   WILL,  703 

The  Pelaglan  Controversy. 

The  man  whose  name  is  inseparably  connected  with  this  contro- 
versy and  gave  it  origin  was  Pelagius,  a  British  monk  of  honest  and 
good  intentions,  who,  seeing  so  much  of  that  so-called  faith  of  which 
St.  James  speaks,  which  is  divorced  from  works,  and  finding  men 
who  used  the  doctrine  of  human  corruption  and  free  grace  to  excuse 
their  own  sins,  thought  to  correct  these  evils  by  preaching  a  rigor- 
ous morality  and  stimulating  men  thereto  by  exalting  their  merely 
human  powers,  setting  forth  possibilities  in  the  spiritual  realm  of 
^\•hich  he  represented  them  to  be  capable  by  the  powers  of  their  own 
will  and  a  culture  of  their  own  faculties. 

Pelagius'  leading  opponent  was  the  great  Augustine,  of  North 
Africa.  Between  these  two  persons  and  their  experiences,  there 
was  as  great  a  difference  as  between  the  opposing  systems  to  which 
each  has  given  his  name.  Pelagius  is  represented  as  a  man  of  cold 
passionless  nature,  who  lived  a  quiet,  cloister  life,  unshaken  by  con- 
flicts from  with6ut  or  within.  Augustine,  as  is  well  known,  was  a  man 
of  ardent  temperament,  and  during  the  "early  period  of  his  life  was  in 
bondage  to  strong  corrupt  passion.  He  passed  through  the  throes 
of  intense  conflict  of  flesh  and  spirit  before  he  arrived  at  peace  with 
conscience  and  with  God,*  and  an  experience  of  that  renovating 
power,  requisite  to  a  holy  life,  ot  which  he  felt  the  need.  Like 
Luther,  his  anthropology  was  born  of  his  own  innermost  experience. 
He  had  himself  been  in  the  depths  of  human  depravity,  and  knew 
himself  to  be  utterly  unable  of  himself  to  get  out  of  the  horrible  pit. 
He  had  experienced  in  himself  the  power  of  divine  grace  as  able  to 
save  unto  the  uttermost.  He  found  in  himself  nothing,  morally  and 
spiritually,  to  commend  or  hang  a  hope  upon:  he  found  in  the 
treasures  of  divine  grace  a  fulness  that  satisfied  all  his  needs.  His 
system  is  found  in  miniature  in  his  own  experience,  and  is  deep  and 
rich:  wliereas  Pelagius,  devoid  of  a  rich  inward  Christian  experi- 
ence, misconceived  the  true  spiritual  nature  of  holiness  and  sanctifi- 
cation,  and  his  most  serious  religious  teaching  never  went  beyond  the 
exhortation  to  live  a  sober  and  virtuous  life  :  and  his  sj'stem  is  cor- 
respondingly superficial,  and  perhaps  for  this  reason  more  acceptable 
to  the  natural  heart. 

The  deepest  ground  of  the  difference  between  Pelagianism  and 
Augustinianism  lies  in  their  respective  views  of  the  relation  between 
the  Creator  and  the  creation,  the  former  looking  upon  the  creature 


704  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  at  first  endowed  by  the  Creator  with  sufficient  powers  and  facul- 
ties, and  then  left  to  itself  to  develop  itself  independently  of  God, 
whereas  the  latter  viewed  the  creature  as  entirely  and  always  de- 
pendent on  the  Creator,  as  much  for  the  continuance  and  develop- 
ment of  its  powers  and  faculties  as  originally  for  their  gift.  Au- 
gustine called  the  relation  of  man  to  God,  even  before  the  fall,  and 
that  of  the  pure  spirits  in  heaven,  by  the  term  gratia.  As  the  eye 
is  circumstanced  to  the  light  of  the  sun,  so  is  the  created  spirit  to 
the  grace  of  God.  Pelagius  said,  "  That  the  eye  can  see  is  the  gift 
of  God ;  whether  it  sees  well  or  ill,  depends  on  ourselves."  In  ref- 
erence to  goodness,  he  distinguished  a  posse,  a  velle  and  an  esse. 
The  posse  is  the  gift  of  God ;  the  velle  and  esse  are  to  be  referred  to 
man  as  proceeding  from  his  will.  All  moral  character,  then,  comes 
from  the  use  man  makes  of  his  powers.  Pelagius  held  that  man 
has  the  ability,  at  every  moment,  of  doing  good  or  evil;  that  his 
will  is,  as  before  the  fall,  in  moral  equilibrium,  which  is  broken  by 
his  clioice  in  every  case.  This  gives  an  atomistic  theory  of  charac- 
ter; it  is  made  to  consist  in  acts  or  the  expression,  and  not  at  all  in 
the  habitus  or  condition.  The  fruit  itself  is  made  the  character  of 
the  tree,  instead  of  an  expression  of  the  character  inherent  in  the 
root  and  sap,  the  trunk  and  leaf 

Pelagius  held  that  our  first  parents  stood  only  for  themselves,  and 
that  their  sin  did  not  affect  the  race  except  by  the  power  of  example. 
Men  are  corrupt  through  constant  habit  of  evil,  not  by  nature. 
They  still  have  the  same  natural  powers  of  holiness  that  Adam  had. 
There  have  been  those,  Pelagius  said,  who  have  lived  without  sin: 
among  his  list  of  whom  he  mentions  Abel,  John  the  Baptist,  and 
Mary,  the  Lord's  mother.  The  Pelagians  appealed  to  the  virtues  of 
the  heathen,  as  evidences  of  the  moral  powers  of  unaided  human 
nature.  Indeed,  the  whole  Pelagian  system  resolved  itself  into  noth- 
ing more  than  natural  religion. 

It  is  such  teachings — "  that  we  are  able,  by  the  mere  powers  of 
nature,  without  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  love  God  above  all 
things,  and  to  do  his  commands,  as  to  the  substance  of  our  actions  " 
— that  the  Augsburg  Confessors  "condemn." 

"  In  the  system  of  Pelagius,"  says  Baur,  "  everything  depends 
upon  the  principle  of  the  freedom  of  the  will:  this  is  the  determin- 
ing and  fundamental  conception  in  his  doctrine  of  sin  and  of  grace. 
Freedom,  as  the  absolute  capacity  of  choice  [liberum  arbiti'iuDi)  to 


FREE    WILL. 


/^D 


determine  equally  for  good  or  evil,  appeared  to  hitn  in  such  a  degree 
to  be  the  substantial  good  of  human  nature,  that  he  even  reckoned 
the  capacity  for  evil  as  a  boinivi  naturae,  since  we  cannot  choose 
good  without  in  like  manner  being  able  to  choose  evil."  We  are 
reminded  here  of  Eve's  argument  with  herself  before  the  forbidden 
tree — she  saw  that  it  was  "a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise," 
and  of  Satan's  persuasion  that  by  eating  of  it  they  would  know  both 
"  good  and  evil." 

Augustine,  on  the  contrary,  held  that  state  of  the  mind  in  which 
it  is  no  longer  necessary  to  choose  between  good  and  evil,  the 
being  free  from  sin,  to  be  the  true  freedom,  and,  in  his  treatise, 
De  Civit.  Dei.,  xiv.  II,  which  was  not  written  against  the  Pelagians, 
says,  "The  will,  therefore,  is  then  truly  free,  when  it  dvoes  not  serve 
vices  and  sins.  Such  it  was  given  by  God;  and,  having  been  lost 
by  man's  own  vice,  it  cannot  be  restored,  unless  by  Him  who  was 
able  to  give  it.  Whence  the  Truth  says,  '  If  the  Son  shall  make 
you  free,  then  shall  ye  be  free  indeed.'  But  this  is  the  very  same  as 
if  He  should  say,  If  the  Son  save  you,  then  shall  ye  be  truly  saved. 
Whence,  forsooth,  He  is  the  Liberator,  the  Saviour." 

Such  a  thing  as  a  characterless  will,  a  liberiim  indiffercntiae ,  in 
equilibrium  between  choices  good  or  ill — such  as  Pelagius  ascribed 
to  man — Augustine  regarded  as  an  impossibility,  contrary  to  the 
very  nature  of  the  faculty  called  will,  and  in  this  he  is  fully  sus- 
tained by  the  philosophers.  Power  to  the  contrary,  in  either  direc- 
tion (of  good  or  evil),  he  considered  only  an  accident  and  not  the 
substance  of  voluntariness.  "  Voluntariness  consists  in  positively 
willing  the  one  thing  that  is  willed,  and  not  in  the  bare  possibility 
of  willing  a  contrary  thing.  If  a  person  walk  by  his  own  self- 
decision,  this  decision  would  be  neither  strengthened  nor  weakened 
by  endowing  him  with  another  power  to  fly.  His  voluntariness 
depends  upon  the  single  fact  that  he  is  walking  without  external  com- 
pulsion, and  of  his  own  accord."  "The  power  of  contrary  choice, 
according  to  the  Augustinian  anthropology,  can  be  given  in  only 
one  direction  " — that  is,  in  the  downward  direction  of  sin.  "  It  is  a 
transient  and  accidental  characteristic  of  the  human  will,  which  is 
intended  to  belong  to  it  only  during  the  middle  or  probationary 
stage  in  its  history,  and  which  disappears  either  in  a  state  of  immu- 
table holiness  or  immutable  sin." 

"  Even  when  the  power  to  the  contrary,  or  \\\>i  possibilitas pecca7idi, 


706  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

is  given  for  purposes  of  probation,  the  real  freedom  of  the  will,  ac- 
cording to  Augustine,  is  seen  in  not  using  it,  rather  than  in  using  it 
— in  continuing  to  will  the  right,  and  refusing  to  will  the  wrong. 
Persistency  in  the  existing  determination,  and  not  a  capricious  de- 
parture into  another  determination,  is  the  token  of  true  rational  lib- 
erty. "Velle  et  nolle,  propriae  voluntatis  est — by  which  Augustine 
means  that  to  will  holiness  and  to  will  sin,  and  to  will  eitlicr  holi- 
ness or  sin,  is  the  characteristic  of  the  will."  On  the  other  hand 
what  the  Latin  anthropology  made  the  accident  of  moral  freedom 
the  Greek  anthropology  made  its  substance,  holding  it  "not  suf- 
ficient that  the  will  be  uncompelled  and  self-moved.  It  must  pos- 
sess, over  and  above  this,  a  power  of  alternative  choice — the 
possibilitas  usque  pm^tis.  Hence  the  human  will,  by  creation  and 
structure,  is  indifferent  and  undetermined.  Having  no  choice  by 
and  at  creation,  it  can  choose  with  equal  facilit}^  either  of  the  two 
contraries,  holiness  or  sin.  And  in  tJiis  fact,  and  not  in  its  positive 
self-motion,  consists  its  freedom."*. 

Here  we  see  an  important  difference  between  the  two  tendencies 
as  to  the  very  nature  of  the  will,  and,  consequently,  in  their  concep- 
tions of  moral  freedom.  This  has  tended  to  confusion  in  the  dis- 
cussion. 

In  the  Pelegian  controversy  the  doctrine  concerning  Grace  natur- 
ally came  in  for  as  much  discussion  as  that  of  Free  Will :  and 
generally  Liberty  and  Grace  are  the  co-ordinate  parts  of  one  and 
the  same  discussion.  In  the  Pelagian  system  there  would  seem  to 
be  no  room  for  grace,  in  the  usual  scripture  sense  of  the  term. 
For  if  children  are  now  born  with  uncorrupted  powers,  equal  to 
those  of  our  first  parents,  and  if,  even  after  sins  committed,  their 
faculties  are  so  unimpaired  that  every  moment  they  have  power  to 
choose  the  good  or  the  evil,  their  probation  also  is  like  that  of  our 
first  parents,  into  which  grace,  in  the  evangelical  sense,  did  not  enter. 
If  man  is  sufficient  of  himself,  what  expectation  or  need  of  grace? 

However,  they  did  not  carry  out  their  principles  to  this  extent, 
but  contended,  sometimes  stoutly,  for  the  necessity  of  grace  as  an 
assistant  to  nature.  Pelagius  asserted  that  God's  grace  enabled  men 
to  accomplish  more  easily  what  they  ought  to  accomplish  by  their 
free  will,  and  admitted  various  stages  in  the  divine  education  of 
humanity  correspondent  to  its  progressive   deterioration.     But,  as 

*  Shedd,  Hist.  Doc,  Vol.  I.,  3,  I  3. 


FREE    WILL.  707 

the  two  systems  differed  in  their  idea  of  freedom,  so  it  was  in  re- 
spect to  grace.  The  Pelagian  view  was  indefinite  and  superficial, 
and  was  always  an  external  communication,  something  foreign,  and 
not,  as  Augustine  viewed  it,  an  impartation  of  divine  life  through 
Christ.  Christ's  work  was  educational.  He  promulgated  a  new  and 
higher  law,  presented  new  motives  to  virtue,  and  gave  a  perfect  ex- 
ample.* But  men  did  not  need  a  Redeemer,  since  they  were  not 
sold  under  sin,  in  moral  bondage;  nor  to  be  born  again  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  renewed  into  the  divine  life  of  Christ,  for  they  were  not 
by  nature  morally  dead. 

Wiggers  compares  the  three  systems  with  each  other  as  follows: 
Augustinianism  asserts  that  man  is  morally  dead ;  Semi-Pelagianism 
maintains  that  he  is  morall\'  sick  ;  Pelagianism  holds  that  he  is  mor- 
ally well.  And  they  that  be  whole  need  not  a  physician.  But  the 
dead  need  to  be  raised,  if  they  are  to  live;  need  to  be  born  again  (or 
from  above)  by  the  new-creating  Spirit  of  God. 

Augustine,  in  his  theory  of  regeneration,  distinguished  three 
stages  of  grace:  gratia  praeveniens  or  praeparans,  which,  without 
any  efficiency  of  man's  powers,  working  sovereignly,  illumines  the 
understanding,  arouses  the  sensibilities,  and  leads  man  to  faith, 
herein  setting  free  the  enslaved  will:  then  {oWow?,  gratia  operans,  or 
grace  working  the  divine  life  in  the  soul,  establishing  it  in  a  peace- 
ful sense  of  justification  and  acceptance  with  God,  confirming  the 
liberated  will  in  choosing  God  and  goodness:  f\n^\\y ,  gratia  cooper- 
aiis,  in  which  the  will  of  man  is  brought  into  entire  harmony  with 
God,  and  a  perfection  is  attained  characterized  by  impossibility  of 
sinning  {jion  posse  peccare),  which  Augustine  regarded  as  the  jral 
freedom,  and  which  is  realized  only  in  the  future  state. 

In  solving  the  problem  how  it  c(^nes  that  grace  is  effective  in 
some  persons  and  fruitless  in  others,  Augustine  argued  that  as  man 
is  at  first,  through  the  bondage  of  his  will,  unable  to  do  any  thing 
toward  his  own  regeneration,  is  dead,  the  reason  of  the  difference 
cannot  be  referred  to  man,  every  individual  person  being  equally 
unable.  Therefore  it  must  be  referred  to  God,  who  works  in  man 
of  his  own  good  pleasure;  and,  accordingly,  Augustine  resorted,  for 
explanation,  to  the  Divine  Sovereignty  and  to  a  Decree  of  uncondi- 
tional Predestination,  whereby  some  are  elected,  irrespective  of  God's 

*See  Neander's  Hist.  Christ.  Dogmas,  Vol.  II.  (Translated  by  Ryland, 
Bohn's  Library.) 


708  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

foreknowledge  concerning  them,  to  everlasting  life,  begun  in  regen- 
eration and  carried  on  by  grace,  whilst  all  others  are  left  to  their 
sinful  selves  without  any  attempt  at  recovery  on  God's  part.  His 
doctrine  doomed  even  infants  to  hell.  It  was  reactionary  against 
the  severity  of  this  doctrine  of  absolute  Predestination  that  the 
Semi-Pelagian  theories  arose,  which  attempted  to  take  a  middle 
ground  between  Pelagianism  and  Augustinianism.  They  con- 
ditioned the  efficiency  of  divine  grace  in  the  individual  upon  an 
internal  recipiency  and  susceptibility  on  his  part.  At  the  head  of 
the  Semi-Pelagian  party  was  John  Cassian,  and,  his  views  may  serve 
to  represent  the  tendency. 

Free  Will,  he  held,  and  Grace  agreed,  and  hence  there  was  an 
opposing  one-sidedness  which  maintained  either  Grace  alone  or  Free 
Will  alone.  Augustine  and  Pelagius  were  each  wrong  in  their  own 
way.  The  idea  of  the  Divine  justice  in  the  deternnnation  of  man's 
lot  after  the  first  transgression  did  not  preponderate  in  Cassian's 
writings  as  in  Augustine's,  but  the  idea  of  a  disciplinary  divine  love, 
by  the  leadings  of  which  men  are  to  be  led  to  repentance.  He  ap- 
peals also  to  the  mysteriousness  of  God's  ways,  not  as  concerns 
predestination,  but  the  variety  of  leadings  by  which  God  leads  dif- 
ferent individuals  to  salvation.  Nor  is  one  law  applicable  to  all  ;  in 
some  cases  Grace  anticipates  [gratia  prcevcnicns),  in  others  a  conflict 
precedes  and  then  divine  help  comes  to  them  as  Grace.  In  no  in- 
stance can  divine  Grace  operate  independently  of  the  free  self-deter- 
mination of  man.  As  the  husbandman  must  do  his  part,  but  all 
this  avails  nothing  without  the  divine  blessing,  so  man  must  do  his 
part,  yet  this  profits  nothing  without  divine  grace.* 

Another  semi-Pelagian  leader,  Faustus,  in  a  presentation  of  the 
pure  doctrine,  compares  the  contrast  of  Freedom  and  Grace  with 
that  of  the  divine  and  human  in  the  person  of  Christ;  as  in  that  its 
peculiar  qualities  are  to  be  attributed  to  each  nature,  so  in  man  we 
must  distinguish  what  proceeds  from  the  grace  of  God  and  what  is 
of  man.  The  Free  Will  must  not  be  regarded  as  annihilated,  but  it 
belongs  to  man  to  regain  the  divine  favor  by  his  own  exertions  and 
God's  help.  A  spark  is  placed  within  him  which  it  behooves  him 
to  cherish  by  the  help  of  grace. 

Before  the  close  of  the  fifth  century  Augustinianism  had  triumphed 
in  the  Western  Church  as  the  orthodox  doctrine,  though  not  with- 

*Neander:    Hist.  Christ,  Dogmas,  Vol.  II. 


FREE    WILL.  709 

out  leaving  in  many  individuals  therein  the  seeds  of  the  contrary 
doctrine.  The  leaders  of  the  Eastern  Church  kept  up  a  decided 
opposition  to  Pelagianism,  yet  the  former  tendency,  toward  confi- 
dence in  the  natural  human  powers,  still  characterized  it. 

In  the  middle  ages  semi-Pelagianism  gradually  supplanted  Au- 
gustinianism,  even  where  the  latter  had  been  before  triumphant,  and 
though  supported  by  Gottschalk,  Bede,  Anselm,  Bernard,  and  most 
of  the  schoolmen,  until  finally  it  was  by  the  Council  of  Trent  form- 
ally stated  as  the  papal  doctrine. 

Chemnitz,'*'  in  his  review  of  this  Council,  expresses  the  opinion 
that  such  doctrines  (semi-Pelagianism)  are  condemned  by  the  lan- 
guage of  the  decrees,  but  quotes  the  expositor  of  the  Council  to  the 
effect  that  said  decrees  were  composed  with  such  ingenuity  as  to 
declare  nothing  positively,  and  to  leave  men  on  the  fence  of  this 
controversy,  free  to  get  down  on  either  side. 

Bellarmin,!  the  great  Romish  expositor,  represents  man  as  created 
in  puris  natiiralibjis — which  is  very  much  like  Pelagius'  non  pleni 
nasciviur — and  that  the  condition  of  man  in  puris  naturalibus  differed 
from  his  condition  after  the  fall  only  as  that  of  a  naked  person  from 
one  who  had  been  stripped  of  his  clothes.  For,  in  the  papal  view, 
original  righteousness  was  not  inherent  in  man's  nature,  but  was  a 
supernatural  endowment;  and,  accordingly,  the  corruption  of  human 
nature  consists  not  in  an  inherent  defect,  but  in  the  loss  of  super- 
natural gifts. 

"  Holding  such  views  of  origindl  sin,"  says  Shedd,  "it  was  logical 
that  the  Tridentine  theologians  should  combat  the  doctrine  of  hu- 
man impotence,  and  the  helpless  dependence  of  the  apostate  will 
upon  the  divine  efficiency  in  order  to  its  renewal.  They  adopt  the 
theory  of  synergism  in  regeneration,  and  defend  it  with  great  earn- 
estness." 

"If  any  one,"  say  the  Tridentine  Canons,  "  shall  affirm  that  the 
free  will  of  man  was  lost,  and  became  extinct,  after  the  sin  of  Adam, 
*  *  *  let  him  be  accursed.  If  any  one  shall  affirm  that  the  free 
will  of  man,  moved  and  excited  by  God,  co-operates  nothing  b)' 
a.ssenting  to  God  thus  exciting  and  calling,  so  that  it  disposes  and 
prepares  itself  for  obtaining  the  grace  of  justification,  but  like  some 


*  Examen  Cone.  Trid.,  Pars  I.,  locus  iii.,  \  i,  Cap.  I. 
fDe  Controversiis,  iv.  15,  vi.  10. 
46 


7IO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

inanimate  object  does  nothing  at  all,  but  is  merely  passive,  let  him 
be  accursed.  If  any  one  shall  affirm  that  all  works  that  are  per- 
formed before  justification,  from  whatever  reason  they  are  done,  are 
really  and  truly  sins,  and  merit  the  displeasure  of  God,  or -that  the 
more  a  man  endeavors  to  dispose  himself  for  grace,  the  more  does 
he  sin,  let  him  be  accursed.  If  any  one  shall  affirm  that  the  sinner 
is  justified  by  faith  alone,  in  the  sense  that  nothing  else  is  requisite 
which  may  co-operate  to  the  attainment  of  the  grace  of  justification, 
and  that  the  sinner  does  not  need  to  be  prepared  and  disposed  by 
the  motion  of  his  own  will,  let  him  be  accursed." 

We  have  come  now  to  the  Reformation  period,  and  to  the  positive 
and  direct  teaching  of  Protestantism,  upon  the  subject  in  hand,  as 
formulated  by  the  Confessors  of  Augsburg  in  their 

Article  XVIII. 

"Concerning  free  will  they  teach,  that  the  human  will  possesses 
some  liberty."  Melanchthon  says  in  the  Apology,  "  Nor,  indeed,  do 
we  deny  liberty  to  the  human  will."  They  did  not  deny  that  uni- 
versal human  consciousness,  distinguishing  man  from  the  rest  of 
creation,  that  his  acts  are  Jiis  own,  unconstrained  by  anything  exter- 
nal. They  did  not  take  away  human  personality,  or  destroy,  by  their 
theory  on  this  subject,  the  possibility  of  a  sense  of  responsibility 
and  guilt,  which  latter  feelings  are  in  other  parts  of  the  Confession 
so  strongly  insisted  upon.  They  did  not  hold  that  any  of  the  hu- 
man faculties  were  destroyed  by  the  fall.  Man  still  has  Reason, 
Feeling,  Will.  But  a  will  without  any  freedom  is  no  will  at  all.  If 
will  is  "the  power  by  which  we  determine  personal  acts"  (Tappan), 
man  still  has  this.  If  "will  is  that  kind  of  causality  attributed  to 
living  agents,  in  so  far  as  they  are  possessed  of  reason ;  and  freedom 
is  such  a  property  of  that  causality  as  enables  them  to  originate 
events  independently  of  foreign  determining  causes"  (Kant),  then 
fallen  and  unregenerate  man  is  still  possessed  of  will  and  freedom 
of  will.  If  "to  be  free  is  to  determine  ourselves"  in  the  sense  of 
"  knowing,  feeling,  and  willing  in  accordance  with  our  individual 
nature  "  (Fichte),  man  still  has  such  freedom.  But  what  if  his  "in- 
dividual nature"  be  changed  from  what  it  was?  "The  question," 
says  Gerhard  (v.  lOO),  "is  not  concerning  the  essence  of  the  will 
itself,  whether  this  has  survived  the  fall ;  for  this  we  loudly  maintain, 
viz.,  that  man  has  lost  not  his  will,  but  the  soundness  of  it."     "The 


FREE    WILL.  71 1 

will,"  he  further  (v.  8y)  says,  "  is  an  essential  power  of  the  soul,  and 
the  soul  is  nothing  else  than  the  powers  or  essential  faculties  them- 
selves. Therefore  whilst  the  soul  remains,  its  essential  powers,  in- 
tellect and  will,  also  remain.  On  the  other  hand,  the  power  of  free 
and  uncoerced  volition  is  essential  to  the  will;  therefore,  as  long  as 
the  will  remains  this  power  also  remains.  In  this  sense  and  in  this 
respect  we  firmly  believe,  and  profess  with  uplifted  voice,  that  the 
will  of  man  has  remained  free  even  after  the  fall."  This  is  what  is 
termed  by  some  "forjna/"  freedom. 

The  sphere  of  this  freedom  allowed  to  fallen  and  unregenerate 
man  by  our  Article  is  "  for  the  performance  of  civil  duties,  and  for 
the  ch6ice  of  those  things  subject  to  reason:"  "works  of  the  present 
life,  as  well  good  as  evil,"  as  they  explain  in  a  quotation  attributed 
to  Augustine;  "good  works  which  arise  from  our  natural  goodness, 
such  as  to  choose  to  labor  in  the  field,  to  eat  and  drink,  to  choose 
to  have  a  friend,  to  have  clothing,  to  build  a  house,  to  take  a  wife, 
to  feed  cattle,  to  learn  various  and  useful  arts,  or  to  do  any  good 
thing  relative  to  this  life;  all  which  things,  however,  do  not  exist 
without  the  divine  government;  yea,  they  exist  and  begin  to  be  from 
him  and  through  him.  And  in  evil  works,  such  as  to  choose  to 
worship  an  idol,  to  will  to  commit  murder,  etc." 

It  is  observable  that  the  instances  of  "  good  works"  here  cited 
embrace  nothing  that  has  moral  quality,  while  as  to  "  evil  works  " 
it  was  scarcely  necessary  to  cite  any;  because  in  the  latter  man's 
freedom  is  by  no  means  denied,  but  in  the  former  the  theory  is  that 
fallen  and  unregenerate  man  can  do  nothing  that  may  be  truly  called 
good,  can  perform  no  good  works,  can  really  do  nothing  but  sin — 
since  "Whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin!"  Accordingly  a  man  may 
externally  observe  all  the  commandments — like  that  earnest  young 
ruler  in  the  Scriptures — and  yet  be  outside,  if  not  far  from,  the 
kingdom  of  God,  be  without  real  goodness.  Thus  one  may  acknowl- 
edge God — for  this,  too,  is  within  the  sphere  of  reason,  since  it  is 
only  "the  fool"  who  says  "there  is  no  God" — may  abstain  from 
taking  his  name  in  vain,  and  from  all  outward  profanity,  may  pay 
outward  and  manifest  respect  to  God's  day  and  house,  worshiping 
(outwardly)  reverently  with  his  people,  may  with  a  beautiful  obedi- 
ence honor  his  parents,  may  curb  his  passions,  keep  himself  pure, 
be  scrupulously  honest,  be  liberal  and  kind,  considerate  of  the  poor 
and  generous  in  the  support  of  religious  and  charitable  institutinos, 


712  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

may,  in  short,  be  a  model  of  an  excellent  citizen ;  and  yet  God,  who 
looks  upon  the  heart,  the  seat  of  character,  and  knows  the  secrets 
thereof,  will  say  of  such  a  man — as  he  virtually  did  of  the  young 
ruler — "Thy  heart  is  not  right  in  the  sight  of  God."  His  is  a 
"natural  goodness"  of  "  outward  works,"  such  as  are  within  "the 
judgment  of  reason,"  a  "performance  of  civil  duties,"  constituting 
a  "civil  righteousness"  or  "righteousness  of  works,"  which  is  within 
the  ability  of  the  unregenerate,  but  cannot  justify  before  God,  and 
which  is  no  part  of  true  sanctification. 

We  have  somewhere  read  of  such  a  man,  one  whose  life  was  so 
exemplary  that  every  one  wondered  why  he  did  not  become  a  mem- 
ber of  the  church.  He  seemed  to  be  such  in  everything  except  the 
profession.  And  when  that  man  lay  upon  his  dying  bed  and  was 
asked  by  the  ambassador  of  Christ,  under  whose  ministrations  he 
had  so  often  sat,  "What  think  you  of  Christ?"  the  poor  man,  with 
conscious  knowledge  of  his  own  heart  and  with  rare  candor  replied, 
"/  liate  him!"  So  radically  different  is  "natural  goodness"  from 
"spiritual  righteousness."  As  Paul  so  impressively  sets  forth  in 
I  Cor.  xiii.  declaring  even  him  who  has  all  knowledge,  and  all  intel- 
lectual faith,  and  all  charitableness,  to  be  nothing  ivithout  love:  and 
"Love  is  of  God"  and  not  of  man!  In  like  manner,  speaking  of 
himself — and  we  know  the  upright  moral  character  of  the  man,  that 
touching  the  righteousness  which  is  in  the  law  he  was  externally 
blameless,  his  outward  character  was  unimpeachable,  y&t  he  dis- 
claims any  real  righteousness,  and  declares  his  aim,  "  That  I  may 
win  Christ,  and  be  found  in  him,  not  having  mine  own  righteous- 
ness, which  is  of  the  law,  but  that  which  is  through  the  faith  ol 
Christ,  the  righteousness  which  is  of  God  by  faith"  (Phil.  iii.  6-1 1). 
Here  and  frequently  he  puts  in  sharpest  contrast  man's  "own  right- 
eousness," that  is,  the  "civil  righteousness"  of  our  Article,  which  is 
possible  to  the  unregenerate,  with  "the  righteousness  of  God," 
which  becomes  man's  only  by  faith. 

The  Apology  says  of  the  human  will,  "  It  can  to  a  certain  extent 
render  civil  righteousness  or  the  righteousness  of  works,  it  can  speak 
of  God,  offer  to  God  a  certain  service  in  outward  works,  obey  magis- 
trates and  parents ;  by  a  choice  in  outward  works  can  restrain  the 
hands  from  murder,  from  adultery,  from  theft.  Since  there  is  left  in 
human  nature  reason  and  judgment  concerning  objects  subjected  to 
the  senses,  choice  between  these  things,  and  the  liberty  and  power 


FREE    WILL.  713 

to  render  civil  righteousness,  are  also  left.  For  Scripture  calls  that 
righteousness  of  the  flesh  (Heb.  ix.  10)  which  the  carnal  nature,  z.  e., 
reason  by  itself  without  the  Holy  Ghost,  renders.  Although  the 
power  of  concupiscence  is  such  that  men  more  frequently  obey  evil 
dispositions  than  sound  judgment.  And  the  devil,  who  is  efficacious 
in  the  godless,  as  Paul  says  (Eph.  ii.  2),  does  not  cease  to  incite  this 
feeble  nature  to  various  offences.  These  are  the  reasons  why  even 
civil  righteousness  is  rare  among  men,  as  we  see  that  not  even  the 
philosophers  themselves,  who  seem  to  have  aspired  after  this  right- 
eousness, attained  it.  But  it  is  false  that  the  man  does  not  sin,  who 
performs  the  works  of  the  commandments  without  grace." 

It  is,  however,  an  extreme  and  untenable  position  when  these  acts 
of  civil  righteousness  and  natural  goodness  are  themselves  called 
sin.  This  overlooks  the  fact  that  the  moral  character  of  an  act  does 
not  always  reside  in  the  motive  only,  but  in  the  act  and  i\\Q  motive; 
so  that,  whilst  the  motive  may  not  be  pure  and  good,  the  act  itself 
may  be.  To  call  such  acts  sins  is  to  confound  distinctions  and 
overthrow  morality.  They  have  a  moral  goodness,  though  not  a 
spiritual  goodness.  The  distinction  between  such  acts  and  the  same 
when  done  from  right  motives,  is  briefly  set  forth  in  that  ever  recur- 
ring opening  to  Luther's  explanations  of  the  commandments,  "That 
we  should  so  fear  and  love  God" — as  not  to  do  evil,  but  the  good 
toward  our  neighbor.  The  absence  of  this  godly  fear,  this  godly 
motive,  from  the  acts  referred  to,  takes  them  out  of  the  religious 
sphere  and  relegates  them  to  the  merely  moral  and  natural.  The 
doer  of  them  cannot  claim  in  virtue  of  them  restoration  to  harmony 
with  God  and  the  truly  good. 

Flavel  compares  the  natural  graces  of  unregenerate  men  to  "flow- 
ers that  decorate  the  dead." 

It  is  in  the  realm  of  spiritual  things  that  the  Confessors  deny  all 
freedom  to  the  human  will.  They  say,  "  But  it  does  not  possess  the 
power,  without  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  fulfilling  the 
righteousness  of  God,  or  spiritual  righteousness:  for  the  natural  man 
receiveth  not  the  things  which  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God:  but  this  is 
accomplished  in  the  heart,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received  through 
the  word.  *  *  jj.  cannot  perform  the  inner  motions,  such 

as  the  fear  of  God,  faith  in  God,  chastity,  patience,  etc."  With  this 
statement  the  other  articles  of  the  Confession,  the  Apology,  the 
Smalcald  Articles,  and   the  Catechisms   of  Luther,  fully  agree;  to 


714  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

prove  which  quotations  from  them  all  are  made  in  the  Formula  of 
Concord,  Sol.  Dec.  II.  We  will  recite  from  these  only  from  the 
Small  Catechism,  the  answer  to  the  question  on  the  Third  Article 
of  the  Creed,  "What  is  meant  by  this  Article?"  The  answer  is,  "  I 
believe  that  I  cannot,  merely  by  my  own  reason  or  natural  powers, 
believe  in  or  come  to  Jesus  Christ,  my  Lord;  but  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  hath  called  me  by  the  gospel,  enlightened  me  by  his  gifts,  and 
sanctified  and  preserved  me  in  the  true  faith,  in  like  manner  as  he 
calls,  gathers,  enlightens,  and  sanctifies  the  whole  Christian  Church 
on  earth,  and  preserves  it  in  union  with  Jesus  Christ,  by  the  true 
faith;  in  which  Christian  Church  he  daily  and  richly  forgives  me 
and  all  other  believers  all  our  sins;  and  will  at  the  last  day,  raise  up 
me  and  all  the  dead,  and  will  grant  unto  me  and  all  that  believe  in 
Jesus  Christ  everlasting  life. — This  is  most  certainly  true." 

Man  was  created  "  in  the  image  of  God."  To  clearly  and  com- 
pletely define  what  is  meant  by  this  is  difficult.  Hollazius  thinks 
that  "The  substance  itself  of  the  human  soul  exhibits  certain  things 
that  are  deia  or  divine,  and  stands  related  to  the  Divinity  as  to  a 
model.  For  God  is  a  Spirit,  immaterial,  intelligent,  acting  with  a 
free  will,  etc.  These  predicates  can  in  a  certain  manner  be  affirmed 
of  the  human  soul."  In  this  sense  man  did  not  lose  the  divine  image 
through  the  fall:  for  the  substance  of  man,  that  which  makes  him 
man,  remains.  Quenstedt  (ii.  17)  says,  "We  must  distinguish  be- 
tween the  substance  of  man,  or  the  matter  itself  of  which  he  is  com- 
posed, and  that  which,  as  if  something  following,  adheres  most 
closely  to  the  substance  of  man,  and  nevertheless,  as  to  its  accidents, 
perfects  it  internally;  or  we  must  distinguish  between  nature  itself 
and  its  qualities,  or  perfections  in  the  qualities  ;  the  image  of  God 
indicates  the  latter,  not  the  former.  In  a  few  words,  that  the  image 
of  God  is  not  man,  but  in  man,  i.  e.  it  is  not  substantial  or  essential 
to  man,  but  accidental."  Wherein  the  divine  image  inhered  in 
man's  substance,  it  could  not  be  lost  without  man's  ceasing  to  be 
man:  wherein  it  inhered  in  man's  faculties  or  qualities  or  the  per- 
fection of  them,  it  was  lost  in  the  fall.  Man's  intellect  was  blinded, 
his  sensibilities  weakened  and  deadened,  his  will  enslaved.  The 
day  he  sinned  he  knew  good  and  evil.  The  divine  sentence,  "  In  the 
day  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die,"  took  inmiediate 
effect:  and  a  chief  part  of  that  death  was  the  loss  of  man's  freedom. 
Henceforth  he  is  the  servant  of  sin.     He  still  indeed  has  the  libertas 


FKEE    WILL.  715 

naturae,  as  explained  above,  a  formal  freedom  of  choice  in  evils. 
but  not  a  freedom  of  power  to  good.  "  He  is  free,"  as  Luthardt 
says,  "  wherein  he  is  unfree :  "  free  in  that  nature  which  he  now  has, 
which  is  a  corrupted,  deteriorated  nature,  and  nowhere  is  this  cor- 
ruption more  surely  seen  than  in  man's  powerlessness  for  good. 
Ask  almost  any  Sunday-school  whether  it  is  easier  to  do  right  or 
to  do  wrong,  and  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  thinking  it  ought  to 
be  so,  the  little  folks  will  answer,  "  To  do  right!  "  Then  when  you 
reply,  "  How  is  it,  then,  that  everybody  does  wrong  ?  "  they  are  puz- 
zled and  still.  Ask  the  same  of  grown  people,  philosophers  and 
theologians;  and  Pelagians  and  Socinians  will  say  it  is  from  the 
habit  of  doing  wrong,  through  the  example  of  Adam.  But  it  seems 
strange  that  a  habit  should  be  universal  ;  that  there  should  be  one 
exception  to  it  and  but  one,  in  the  whole  history  of  man.  And 
surely  none  can  by  mere  habit  become  a  child  of  God  or  a  child  of 
the  devil.  Reason  and  experience  unite  in  pronouncing  such  an 
answer  unsatisfactory.  But  when  it  is  alleged  that  all  mankind, 
since  the  fall,  are  under  a  power  operating  on  the  soul  with  the  like 
force  of  gravitation  upon  material  bodies,  and  that  there  is  in  all 
men  at  birth  an  inertia  of  downward  direction,  from  the  force  of 
which  external  power  is  required  to  deliver  him,  then  man's  evil 
status  is  sufficiently  explained. 

The  statement  of  the  Formula  of  Concord  on  the  controversy  con- 
cerning human  powers,  is,*  "  That  in  spiritual  and  divine  things  the 
intellect,  heart  and  will  cannot,  in  any  way,  by  their  own  natural 
powers,  understand,  believe,  accept,  think,  will,  begin,  effect,  do, 
work  or  concur  in  working  an\'thing,  but  they  are  entirely  dead  to 
good,  and  corrupt;  so  that  in  man's  nature,  since  the  fell,  there  is, 
before  regeneration,  not  the  least  spark  of  spiritual  power  remaining 
still  present,  by  which,  of  himself,  he  can  prepare  himself  for  God's 
grace,  or  accept  the  offered  grace,  or  for  and  of  himself,  be  capable 
of  it,  or  apply  or  accommodate  himself  thereto,  or,  by  his  own 
powers,  be  able  of  himself,  as  of  himself,  to  aid,  do,  work  or  concur 
in  working  anything  for  his  conversion,  either  entirely,  or  in  half,  or 
in  even  the  least  or  most  inconsiderable  part,  but  he  is  the  servant 
of  sin  (John  viii.  34  ;  Eph  ii.  2  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  26).  Hence  the  natural  free 
will,  according  to  its  perverted  disposition  and  nature,  is  strong  and 
active  only  with  respect  to  what  is  displeasing  and  contrary  to  God." 

*Form.  Cone.  Part  II.     Sol.  Dec. 


7^6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

This  reads  like  a  legal  paper,  in  its  effort  to  be  explicit  and  exclu- 
sive. The  prime  question  concerning  this  doctrine  is,  Is  it  accord- 
ing to  the  Holy  Scriptures? 

Proof  from  the  Scriptures  of  Man's  Inability  to*  Good. 

God  said  to  Adam  in  reference  to  the  forbidden  tree  (Gen.  ii.  17), 
"  In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof,"  i.  e.  in  the  day  that  thou  sin- 
nest,  "  thou  shalt  surely  die."  The  truth  of  God,  observation  and 
experience  testify  that  straightway  upon  man's  disobedience  this 
sentence  was  executed  upon  him.  Accordingly  Paul  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  (Eph.  ii.  I— 3),  speaking  of  their  natural  state,  calls  them, 
"  Dead  in  trespasses  and  sins" — a  death  which  yet  had  about  it  ac- 
tivity, a  freedom  of  death — "  wherein,"  he  continues,  "  in  time  past 
ye  walked  according  to  the  course  of  this  world,  according  to  the 
prince  of  the  power  of  the  air,  the  spirit  that  now  worketh  in  the 
children  of  disobedience  :  among  whom  also  we  all  had  our  conver- 
sation in  times  past  in  the  lust  of  our  flesh,  fulfilling  the  desires  of 
the  flesli  and  of  the  mind  ;  and  were  by  nature  the  children  of  wrath, 
even  as  others." 

Shortly  before  the  flood  we  read  (Gen.  vi.  3)  that,  "  The  Lord  said, 
My  Spirit  shall  not  always  strive  with  man,  for  that  he  also  is  flesh  :  " 
and,  a  little  after,  that  God  saw  that  the  wickedness  of  man  was  great 
in  the  earth,  and  that  every  imagination  of  the  thoughts  of  his  heart 
was  only  evil  continually:  "  and  the  Psalmist  in  two  places  (Ps.  xiv. 
2,  3  ;  liii.  2,  3),  wherein  he  is  quoted  by  Paul  to  the  Romans  (Rom. 
iii.  10,  sq.)  as  uttering  a  general  truth,  represents  God  as  looking 
down  from  heaven  "  to  see  if  there  were  any  that  did  understand  and 
seek  God,"  and  coming  to  the  conclusion,  in  his  perfect  knowledge 
of  all  hearts,  "They  are  all  gone  aside,  they  are  together  become 
filthy  ;  there  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no  not  one."  Compare  with 
this  our  Lord's  words  to  Nicodemus  (John  iii.  6),  "That  which  is 
born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is 
spirit,"  explaining  his  assertion,  "  Ye  must  be  born  again  ;  "  and 
Paul's  contrast  between  "  the  flesh"  and  "  the  Spirit  "  and  his  delinea- 
tions of  the  conflict  between  the  two,  meaning  by  "  the  flesh  "  not 
merely  the  body,  or  the  sensuous  nature,  but  the  whole  corrupt 
nature  of  fallen  man.  David  in  the  fifty-first  Psalm  cries  out,  not  in 
extenuation  of  his  crime,  but  in  illustration  of  his  desperate  need  of 
God's  grace,  "Behold,  I  was  shapen  in  iniquity;  and  in  sin  did  my 
mother  conceive  me  "  (Ps.  Ii.  5). 


FREE"    WILL,  71  7 

The  whole  tenor  of  the  Old  Testament  shows  on  the  one  hand  the 
absolute  necessity  of  spiritual  righteousness,  and  at  the  same  time 
man's  utter  inability  to  attain  to  it:  and  thus  makes  man  feel  his 
need  of,  and  prepares  the  way  for  redeeming  grace  in  Christ. 

Of  the  Jews  of  his  day,  so  punctilious  in  outward  observances,  the 
Saviour  said,  quoting  from  Isaiah  (Matt.  xv.  8),  "  This  people 
draweth  nigh  unto  me  with  their  mouth,  and  honoreth  me  with  their 
lips;  but  their  heart  is  far  from  me.  But  in  vain  do  they  worship 
me."  And  explained  to  his  disciples  that  "  Out  of  the  heart  pro- 
ceed all  the  things  that  defile  a  man.''  Paul  (Eph.  iv.  17,  18)  char- 
acterizes the  unregenerate  as  walking  "  in  the  vanity  of  their  mind, 
having  the  understanding  darkened,  being  alienated  from  the  life 
of  God  through  the  ignorance  that  is  in  them,  because  of  the  blind- 
ness of  their  hearts." 

(i  Cor.  ii.  14:)  "The  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the 
Spirit  of  God:  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him:  neither  can  he 
know  them,  because  they  are  spiritually  discerned."  See  the  whole 
of  the  passage  in  i  Cor.  i.  18  to  ii.  6,  in  which  it  is  set  forth 
strongly  that  (i  Cor.  i.  21),  "  After  that,  in  the  wisdom  of  God,  the 
world  by  wisdom  knew  not  God,  it  pleased  God  by  the  foolishness 
of  preaching  to  save  them  that  believe."  Saul  converted  was  sent 
to  the  Gentiles  (Acts  xxvi.  18)  "  To  open  their  eyes,  to  turn  them 
from  darkness  to  light,  and  from  the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that 
they  may  receive  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  inheritance  among  them 
which  are  sanctified  by  faith  that  is  in  me"  (Christ). 

The  state  of  the  natural  man  respecting  spiritual  things  is  repre- 
sented in  the  Scriptures  as  "darkness"  (Eph.  v.  8)  and  "The  Light 
shineth  in  darkness;  and  the  darkness  comprehended  it  not"  {John 
i.  5).  And  our  Saviour  says  (Matt.  vi.  23),  "  If,  therefore,  the  light 
that  is  in  thee  be  darkness,  how  great  is  the  darkness!"  "Without 
me,"  says  Christ  to  his  disciples  (John  xv.  5),  "ye  can  do  nothing:" 
a  statement  confirmed  by  the  illustration  of  the  vine  and  the 
branches.  A  branch  of  the  vine  is  of  necessity  incapable  of  bearing 
any  fruit.  (2  Cor.  iii.  5  :)  "  Not  that  we  are  sufficient  of  ourselves 
to  think  anything  of  ourselves;  but  our  sufficiency  is  of  God." 
(Rom.  viii.  7  :)  "  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God  ;  for  it  is 
not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can  be."  Hence, 
(John  iii.  3),  "  E.xcept  a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  king- 
dom of  God."     And  (2  Cor.  v.    17),  "  Therefore  if  any  man  be  in 


71  8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Christ  he  is  a  new  creature:"  and  man  can  no  more  create  himself 
anew  than  he  could  create  himself  at  first.  Of  but  One  we  say,  "  He 
can  create,  and  He  destroy!"  (Eph.  ii.  8:)  Faith  itself  is  declared 
to  be  "the  gi.ft  of  God."  And  (i  Cor.  xii.  3),  "  No  man  can  say 
that  Jesus  is  the  Lord,  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  (Acts  v.  31): 
Christ  is  declared  to  be  exalted  "  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  "  as 
well  as  "  forgiveness  of  sins."  Paul  admonishes  Timothy  to  meek- 
ness and  patience  with  men  (2  Tim.  ii.  25),  "  If  God  peradventure 
will  give  them  repentance  to  the  acknowledging  of  the  truth."  To 
the  Jews,  so  careful  about  external  acts,  having  a  righteousness  of 
the  law,  or  civil  righteousness,  which  put  them  in  esteem  among 
men  and  for  which  they  greatly  esteemed  themselves,  the  Saviour 
said  (John  viii.  31-36),  "If  ye  continue  in  my  word,  then  are  ye  my 
disciples  indeed  ;  and  ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall 
make  you  free."  To  which  they  indignantly  replied,  "We  be  Abra- 
ham's seed,  and  were  never  in  bondage  to  any  man:  how  sayest 
thou,  Ye  shall  be  made  free?  Jesus  answered  them.  Verily,  verily, 
I  say  unto  you.  Whosoever  committeth  sin  is  the  servant  of  sin. 
And  the  servant  abideth  not  in  the  house  forever;  but  the  Son  abid- 
eth  ever.  If  the  Son  therefore  shall  make  you  free,  ye  shall  be  free 
indeed!" 

We  will  let  these  citations  suffice,  though  many  more  to  the  same 
purpose  might  be  given. 

The  remedy  for  man's  inability,  thus  so  fully  declared,  the  re- 
covery to  real  freedom,  is  also  in  this  article  set  forth  by  the  Con- 
fessors. They  declare  that  this  power  for  spiritual  righteousness  "  is 
accomplished  in  the  heart  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received  through 
the  word."     This  means 

Regeneration  and  Conversion. 

These  terms  are  often  used  synonymously:  but  it  promotes 
clearer  views  to  understand  by  the  former  the  new  birth,  and  by  the 
latter  the  exhibitions  of  the  new  life  in  turning  day  by  day  from  sin 
and  Satan  to  holiness  and  God.  The  necessity  for  such  change  is 
evident  from  the  natural  state  of  fallen  man  as  it  has  already  been 
described,  and  from  Scripture  citations  that  have  already  been  given, 
as  well  as  others  that  might  be  quoted.  But  the  point  at  which 
our  Article  touches  this  subject  is  not  one  concerning  the  fact  of 
regeneration  and  conversion,  but  concerning  the  agency  of  their  ac- 
complishment. 


FREE    WILL.  719 

The  Pelagians  taught  that  man  by  his  own  powers,  without  the 
grace  of  God,  can  turn  himself  to  God,  believe  the  gospel,  work 
spiritual  righteousness,  and  merit  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  eternal 
life.  The  semi-Pelagians  taught  that  man  by  his  own  powers  can 
make  a  beginning  of  his  conversion,  but  cannot  complete  it  without 
God's  grace.  Others  taught  that  whilst  man  is  unable  to  make  a 
beginning,  yet,  after  a  beginning  is  made  by  divine  grace,  man  can 
by  his  own  natural  powers  add,  help  and  co-operate  in  the  work  of 
renewal. 

The  Confessors  deny  to  man's  natural  powers  any  ability  or  share 
whatever,  exercised  in  and  of  themselves,  in  this  work.  They 
ascribe  it  from  beginning  to  end  to  the  grace  of  God  ministered  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Scriptures  say,  ''Repent'' — but  Christ  gives 
repentance:  the  Scriptures  s^.y,"  Believe" — but  faith  is  the  gift  of 
God  :  the  Scriptures  enjoin  perfect  love,  and  declare  one  without 
love  to  be  nothing,  spiritually — but  love  is  of  God,  and  he  that 
loveth  is,  and  must  first  have  been,  born  of  God.  It  is  the  Holy 
Spirit  that  opens  the  blind  eyes,  illumines  the  darkened  understand- 
ing, convincing  man  of  sin:  it  is  the  Holy  Spirit  that  awakens  and 
elevates  the  affections,  leading  man  to  love  what  God  loves  and  hate 
what  God  hates:  it  is  the  Holy  Spirit  that  works  in  man  to  will  and 
to  do  (Phil.  ii.  13)  of  God's  good  pleasure,  delivering  the  bond-ser- 
vants of  sin  and  introducing  them  into  the  liberty  of  the  glory  of  the 
sons  of  God.  (Rom.  viii.  21.)  And  he  does  this  "through  the 
word,"  the  Holy  Scriptures.  "  God  the  Holy  Ghost  effects  conver- 
sion not  without  means  ;  but  uses  for  this  purpose  the  preaching  and 
hearing  of  God's  word,  as  it  is  written  (Rom.  i.  16),  'The  Gospel  is 
the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth.'  Also 
(Rom.  X.  17),  '  Faith  cometh  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of 
God.'  With  this  word  the  Holy  Ghost  is  present,  and  opens  hearts, 
so  that  they,  as  Lydia  in  Acts  xvi.,  are  attentive  to  it  and  are  thus 
converted."*  Thus  at  Pentecost  Peter's  hearers'  hearts  were  pricked 
with  contrition:  and  similarly  Christ  opened  the  hearts  of  the  dis- 
ciples going  to  Emmaus  to  understand  the  Scriptures. 

"  For  after  that,  in  the  wisdom  of  God,  the  world  by  wisdom  knew 
not  God,  it  pleased  God  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching,  to  save 
them  that  believe"'  (i  Cor.  i.  21).  "  Sanctify  them  by  thy  truth," 
prays  our  Lord  ;  "  thy  word  is  truth  "  (John  xvii.  17,  18). 

*Form.  Cone,  Part  I,  2. 


720  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Hence  those  who  imagine  that  without  means,  without  the  word 
and  the  sacraments,  the  Holy  Spirit  illumines  men,  draws  them  to 
himself,  justifies  and  sanctifies  them,  as  well  as  those  who  think  to 
attain  these  ends  by  their  own  preparation,  feelings,  struggles  and 
works  of  whatever  sort,  are  in  error. 

Now  if  it  be  asked  what  we  are  to  make  of  the  many  invitations 
of  the  Scriptures  inviting  and  urging  men  to  accept  God's  grace,  to 
come  to  Christ,  to  seek  and  strive,  we  answer  that  these  refer  to 
those  external  things  which  are  within  the  power  of  man,  such  as  to 
use  the  means  God  has  provided,  to  read  the  word,  to  go  to  church, 
to  give  attention  to  spiritual  things,  while  at  the  same  time  our 
Lord's  word  is  still  most  true,  "  No  man  can  come  to  me  except  the 
Father  which  hath  sent  me  draw  him"  (John  vi.  44).  But  even  those 
very  invitations  are  drawing  toward  Christ,  and  in  the  use  of  the 
means  one  will  find  these  drawings  increasing  more  abundantly. 

It  was  to  a  little  girl  whose  spirit  had  just  left  her  body  (Lk.  viii. 
41—56)  that  Jesus  said,  "  Maid,  arise,"  and  she  arose  straightway  : 
it  was  to  a  young  man  whose  corpse  they  were  bearing  to  the  grave 
(Lk.  vii.  11-15)  that  Jesus  said,  "Young  man,  I  say  unto  thee, 
arise";  and  he  that  was  dead  sat  up  and  began  to  speak  :  it  was  to 
a  man  who  had  been  dead  four  days  already  and  been  buried 
(John  xi.  39-44)  that  Jesus  said,  "  Lazarus,  come  forth,"  and  he  came 
out  with  his  grave  clothes  bound  about  him.  And  these  are  but 
types  of  God's  word  to  men  "  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins,"  young 
and  old,  bidding  them  live  :  the  words  that  Jesus  speaks  to  them 
are  spirit  and  life  ;  and  when  his  "  I  say  unto  you  "  comes  to  any 
one,  there  comes  with  it  power  to  do  the  bidden  thing.  But  the 
condition  is,  "  If  any  man  will  hear  his  voice!  "  For  the  bad  power 
of  closing  and  hardening  the  heart  belongs  to  man. 

Predestination. 
Here  arises  a  question,  at  once  philosophical  and  practical.  How 
is  it  that,  among  those  to  whom  the  gospel  is  preached  and  God's 
grace  offered,  some  are  regenerated  and  converted,  and  others  are 
not  ?  If  men  are  equally  unable  to  do  anything  whatsoever  toward 
this  end,  and  are  equally  hostile  to  God,  the  logical  deduction  seems 
to  be  that  the  cause  of  the  difference  inquired  into  lies  in  God. 
Augustine  accepted  this  conclusion  and  resorted  to  the  theory  of 
unconditional   Predestination,  based    on    the    sovereignty    of  God. 


FREE    WILL.  721 

God  has  from  all  eternity  chosen  a  portion  of  mankind  to  be  the 
recipients  of  his  grace  and  salvation,  and  that  irrespective  of  any  fore- 
seen faith  or  character  in  them,  and  has  left  the  rest  of  mankind  in 
their  fallen,  helpless  and  condemned  condition.  Moreover,  to  the 
chosen  ones  God's  grace  is  an  irresistible  power,  overcoming  the 
utmost  intensity  of  man's  self-will  and  aversion. 

It  is  just  here  that  our  Church  parts  company  with  Augustinianism. 
Having  kept  it  close  company  all  through  the  subject  of  Anthro- 
pology hitherto,  here  she  draws  the  line  and  says,  "  Thus  far,  but  no 
further."  It  is  into  this  theological  slough  that  our  Missouri  breth- 
ren have  fallen,  in  the  midst  of  which  they  are  struggling,  while 
Calvinists,  creeping  out  at  the  sides,  in  amazement  cry,  "  Are  ye  be- 
come like  unto  us?'  and  the  Ohio  and  Wisconsin  brethren  are 
vigorously  throwing  stones  at  them,  with  reproaches  for  so  besmirch- 
ing the  ''  reinc  Lelire  l'"" 

For  whilst  Luther  and  other  individuals  in  Reformation  times 
may  have  been  extreme  Predestinarians  of  the  Augustinian  type, 
this  never  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  Arnong  the  points 
expressly  condemned  in  the  Formula  of  Concord  are  these: 

1.  When  it  is  taught  that  God  does  not  wish  all  men  to  repent 
and  believe  the  gospel. 

2.  That,  when  God  calls  us  to  himself,  he  is  not  in  earnest  that  all 
men  should  come  to  him. 

3.  That  God  does  not  wish  every  one  to  be  saved,  but,  without 
regard  to  their  sins,  alone  from  the  counsel,  purpose  and  will  of 
God,  some  are  appointed  to  condemnation,  so  that  they  cannot  be 
saved. 

And  the  sam.e  authority  declares : — That,  however,  "  many  are 
called,  {q.w  are  chosen,"  does  not  mean  that  God  is  unwilling  that  all 
should  be  saved,  but  the  reason  is  that  they  either  do  not  at  all  hear 
God's  word,  but  willfully  despise  it,  close  their  ears  and  harden  their 
hearts,  and  in  this  manner  foreclose  the  ordinary  way  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  so  that  he  cannot  effect  his  work  in  them,  or,  when  it  is 
heard,  they  consider  it  of  no  account,  and  do  not  heed  it.  For  this 
[that  they  perish]  not  God  or  his  election,  but  their  wickedness,  is 
responsible.* 

Paying  less  attention  to  logic  and  more  to  the  Scriptures,  our 
Church  teaches  that  the  reason  why  any  to  whom  the  gospel  is 

*Form.  Cone,  Part  I,  11, 


72  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

preached  and  grace  is  offered  are  not  regenerated,  converted  and 
saved,  is  because  they  resist  the  Holy  Ghost  and  refuse  to  accept 
the  offered  grace.  For  in  evil  we  have  seen  that  man  has  freedom 
of  will,  and  he  may  by  his  own  natural  powers  refuse  and  resist  God's 
grace.  And  if  it  be  said  that  the  natural  resistance  of  all  men  is 
alike  and  the  same,  we  reply  that  there  may  be  and  is  an  additional, 
superadded,  wilful  resistance.  For  just  as  the  regenerate  man, 
through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  with  which  his  renewed 
powers  can  and  do  now  co-operate,  goes  on  from  grace  to  grace, 
from  strength  to  strength,  in  that  which  is  good,  so  the  unrenewed, 
following  the  evil  bent  of  his  depraved  mind  through  voluntary 
choices,  goes  on  to  more  ungodliness  :  and  so  there  are,  from  many 
occasions,  differences  in  the  voluntary  character  of  unregenerate 
men.  Moreover,  God  has  too  much  respect  for  his  creature  man,  to 
un-man  him  by  forcing  his  will:  God  will  not,  to  convert  man, 
destroy  his  moral  agency.  And  though  the  Scriptures  speak  of  the 
natural  heart  as  a  hard  and  stony  heart,  and  some  of  our  theologians 
have  expressed  themselves  very  strongly  in  comparing  the  natural 
man  to  a  block  or  stone  or  pillar  of  salt,  yet,  as  the  Formula  of  Con- 
cord (Part  ii.  2)  says,  "  God  has  a  modus  agcndi,  or  way  of  working 
in  a  man,  as  in  a  rational  creature,  quite  different  from  his  way  of 
working  in  another  creature  that  is  irrational,  or  in  a  stone  and 
block."  He  treats  him  as  a  man,  enlightens,  beseeches,  urges, 
threatens,  but  does  not  force  him. 

Said  Christ  to  Jerusalem  that  had  neglected  and  despised  her  day 
of  grace  (Matt,  xxiii.  '^'j^,  "How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy 
children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her 
wings,  and  ye  would  not!"  Stephen  to  the  same  generation  said 
(Acts  vii.  5  i),  "  Ye  stiff-necked  and  uncircumcised  in  heart  and  ears, 
ye  do  always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost:  as  your  fathers  did,  so  do  ye." 
To  the  Ephesians  Paul  says  (Eph.  iv.  30),  "And  grieve  not  the  fioly 
Spirit  of  God:"  and  to  the  Thessalonians  (i  Thess.  v.  19),  "Quench 
not  the  Spirit."  Man  is  regarded  as  so  much  harder  for  God  to 
work  upon  than  even  a  stone  or  block,  in  that  he  has  this  power  of 
resisting  God  in  spiritual  things,  which  by  their  very  nature  must 
be  voluntary. 

Calvin,  at  the  head  of  the  Reformed  Church,  fully  adopted  the 
Augustinian  theory  of  Predestination,  and  sought  to  bring  over 
Melanchthon  to  the  same  view:  but  the  latter  was  horrified  at  the 


FREE    WILL.  723 

doctrine,  and  called  Calvin  "the  modern  Zeno,  who  wanted  to  in- 
troduce a  stoical  necessity  into  the  Church."  Neander  sa\'S  that 
when  CaKiii  sent  hini  his  confession  of  faith,  Melanchthon  struck 
his  pen  through  the  whole  passage  on  Predestination.* 

It  was,  i)r()bably,  on  account  of  his  revulsion  from  this  doctrine, 
and  his  sense  of  the  logical  tendency  of  a  rigid  monergism  in  that 
direction,  that  Melanchthon,  in  his  writings  subsequent  to  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  and  the  Apology,  allowed  that  there  was  in  man's 
natural  powers  "a  feculty  of  applying  himself  to  grace,"  and  taught 
that  there  are  three  concurrent  causes  in  man's  regeneration  and 
conversion,  viz.,  the  Word  of  God,  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  will  of 
man.  He  made  the  non-resisting  will  of  man  an  active  factor. 
This  teaching  is  seen  in  the  1835  and  1843  editions  of  his  Loci 
Thcologici.  This  co- operation  of  man  by  his  natural  powers  in 
spiritual  things  is  called  synergism,  and  is  condemned  by  the  stan- 
dards of  our  Church. 

Says  the  Formula  of  Concord,  "  Conversion  to  God  is  a  work  of 
God,  the  Holy  Ghost  alone,  who  is  the  true  master- workman  that 
alone  woiks  this  in  us,  for  which  he  uses  the  preaching  and  hearing 
of  his  Holy  Word  as  his  ordinary  means  and  instrument.  But  the 
undei'standing  and  will  of  the  unregenerate  man  are  nothing  else 
than  the  siibjccthnnn  co7ivcrtendi(in,i.  e.  that  which  is  to  be  converted, 
as  the  imderstanding  and  will  of  a  spiritually  dead  man,  in  whom 
the  Holy  Ghost  works  conversion  and  renewal,  for  which  work  the 
will  of  the  man  who  is  to  be  converted  does  nothing,  but  allows 
God  alone  to  work  in  him,  until  he  is  regenerate;  and  then  also  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  he  works  (co-operates)  in  other  succeeding  good 
works,  that  which  is  pleasing  to  God,  in  the  way  and  to  the  extent 
fully  set  forth  above."  f 

As  has  been  said,  the  two  tendencies,  represented  by  Pelagius  and 
Augustine,  continue  until  this  day.  The  Romish  Churcir  still 
teaches  that  man's  moral  nature  was  not  totally  depraved  by  the 
fall,  but  only  weakened,  and  that,  therefore,  man  can  fit  himself 
through  his  own  moral  power  for  the  acceptance  of  justifying  grace, 
and  thus  to  a  certain  extent  merit  the  same,  and  is  able,  after  renew- 
ing justif\-ing  grace,  not  only  to  keep  all  God's  commandments  and 


*See  Neander:  Hist.  Christ,  Dogmas,  VoL  II. 

fForm.  Cone,  Part  II,  2. 


724  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

through  good  works  directly  to  merit  eternal  salvation,  but  even  to 
perform  works  of  supererogation.  The  Calvinistic  and  Arminian 
controversy  has  kept  up  the  antagonism  concerning  the  nature  of 
man's  inheritance  from  Adam,  irresistible  grace  and  predestination. 
And  the  modern  Socinians  and  Rationalists,  in  advocacy  of  philan- 
throphy  and  humanity,  speak  chiefly  of  the  dignity  and  possibilities 
of  man,  exalting  his  merely  natural  powers,  so  detracting  from  the 
necessity  and  worth  of  God's  grace. 

It  is  not  long  since  we  heard  a  distinguished  Unitarian  divine,* 
setting  forth  the  tenets  of  his  sect,  extol  their  humanity,  their  repu- 
tation for  education  and  culture,  and  say  it  was  no  part  of  their 
teaching  to  say  or  sing,  "Oh,  to  be  nothing,  nothing."  f  but  rather 
"Oh,  to  be  something,  somctliing !'' — a  laudable  ambition,  indeed,  if 
sought  for  in  the  only  way  by  which  man  may  recover  his  original 
freedom  and  greatness  and  attain  even  higher  position  than  that. 
That  man  who,  excepting  the  Perfect  One,  was  "something"  above 
any  of  whom  history  speaks,  declares,  "By  the  grace  of  God  I  am 
what  I  am!"  But  there  was  little  or  nothing  heard  of  grace  in  the 
discourse  or  on  the  occasion  of  which  we  speak. 

Indeed,  the  times  are  not  characterized  by  deep  sense  of  sin  or 
helpless  need  of  God's  grace  as  offered  in  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Men  have  not  time  to  know  themselves.  The  demands  of  business 
and  of  society  are  all-engrossing.  God's  word  and  ordinances  are 
much  slighted  by  indifference  or  haste.  So  that  men  come  to  feel 
that  they  do  not  need  the  Church  ;  they  can  be  as  good  without. 
And  this,  from  the  easy-going  trifler  who  can  worship  God  as 
well  in  the  field  as  in  the  congregation  of  his  people,  and  needs 
not  the  Bible,  since  it  is  no  more  inspired  than   all  truth,  nor  the 

*  Dr.  Ware,  of  Boston,  at  dedication  of  All  Souls'  Church,  Washington, 
D.  C. 

t  The  whole  stanza  reads  : 

Oh,  to  be  nothing,  nothing, 

Only  to  lie  at  his  feet, 
A  broken  and  emptied  vessel, 

For  the  Master's  use  made  meet. 
Emptied  that  he  might  fill  me 

As  forth  to  his  service  I  go ; 
Broken,  that  so  unhindered. 

His  life  through  me  might  flow. 


FREE    WILL.  725 

sacraments,  since  they  are  too  simple  or  or  too  supernatural  to  mean 
anything  to  him — to  the  educated,  thinking  apostles  and  devotees 
of  culture,  who  think  to  attain  the  highest  development  by  the  ex- 
ercise and  discipline  of  their  own  natural  powers. 

Even  in  the  Sunday  school  the  young  people  are  carelessly  taught 
to  sing  such  songs  as  "  Only  an  armor-bearer,"  with  its  boastful, 
self-dependent  chorus,  "Surely  the  Captain  can  depend  on  me:"  and 
these  self-vaunting,  subjective,  rollicking  songs  claim  equal  place 
with  such  hymns  as  "  I  need  Thee  every  hour.  Most  Gracious 
Lord,"  and,  "  More  love  to  Thee,  O  Christ,  more  love  to  Thee," 
and,  "Rock  of  Ages,  cleft  for  me.  Let  me  hide  myself  in  Thee" — 
hymns  born  of  a  consciousness  of  human  helplessness  and  the  hum- 
ble spirit  of  entire  dependence  on  God,  the  God  of  our  salvation. 

The  practical  effect  of  our  Church's  teaching  in  the  matter  of 
Liberty  and  Grace  should  be,  upon  the  unregenerate,  to  lead  them 
to  constantly  use  the  means  of  grace,  that  they  may  be  in  the  way  of 
salvation,  and,  when  Jesus  of  Nazareth  passeth  by,  may  have  their 
eyes  opened  to  see  and  know  their  Liberator,  their  Saviour;  to  make 
them  fear  lest,  by  neglecting  and  resisting  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  may 
grieve  him  away  and  they  be  left  forever  in  their  helpless  bondage 
to  sin;  that,  when  God  calls,  they  may  not  refuse,  and  reject  the 
counsel  of  God  against  themselves,  to  their  everlasting  death.  And 
upon  the  regenerate  the  effect  should  be  to  make  them  diligent  in 
the  great  business  of  life,  quick  to  listen  to  and  obey  the  Spirit's 
sanctifying  influences,  careful  lest  they  receive  the  grace  of  God  in 
vain,  working  out  their  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling,  while 
God  works  in  them  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure:  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  to  make  them  eager  to  bring  to  the  knowledge  of 
all  people  that  sacred  word  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  en- 
lightens, frees  and  sanctifies  the  heart,  that  all  men  may  come,  ac- 
cording to  God's  gracious  will  (i  Tim.  ii.  4),  to  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth  and  be  saved. 

47 


ARTICLE  XIX. 


THE  CAUSE  OF  SIN. 

BY  S.  A.  REPASS,  D.  D. 


THE  translation  we  employ  is  that  made  by  Dr.  Krauth  and  con- 
tained in  his  edition  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.     It  reads  as 
follows : 

"  Touching  the  cause  of  sin,  they  teach,  that  although  God  doth  create  and 
preserve  nature,  yet  the  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  wicked ;  to  wit,  of  the 
devil,  and  ungodly  men  ;  which  will,  God  not  aiding,  turneth  itself  from  God, 
as  Christ  saith,  '  When  he  speaketh  a  lie,  he  speaketh  of  his  own,'  John  viii. 
44." 

The  following  is  the  original  in  Latin  and  German  (Miiller,  Symb.  BUcher) : 

"  De  causa  peccata  docent,  quod  tametsi  Deus  creat  et  conservat  naturam, 
tamen  causa  peccati  est  voluntas  malorum,  videlicet  diaboli  et  impiorum,  quae, 
non  adjuvante  Deo,  avertit  se  a  Deo,  sicut  Christus  ait,  John  8.  Quum  loquitur 
mendacium,  ex  se  ipso  loquitur." 

"Von  Ursach  der  SUnden  wird  bei  uns  gelehret,  dass,  wiewohl  Gott  der  Al- 
machtige  die  ganze  Natur  geschaffen  hat  und  erhalt,  so  wirket  doch  der  ver- 
kehrte  Wille  die  Slide  in  alien  Bosen  und  Veraachtern  Gottes,  wie  denn  des 
Teufels  Wille  ist  und  aller  Gottlosen,  welcher  alsbald,  so  Gott  die  Hand  abge- 
than,  sich  von  Gott  zum  argen  gewandt  hat,  wie  Christus  spricht,  John  viii.  44. 
Der  Teufel  redet  Liigen  aus  seinem  eigen." 

"  The  article  belongs  to  those  held  by  the  Christians  in  common, 
embracing  a  truth  confessed  alike  by  Greek  and  Roman  Catholic, 
no  less  than  by  every  type  of  Protestintism.  It  also  falls  among  the 
conservative  articles,  those  held  by  the  Lutheran  Church  in  their 
purity,  over  against  the  corruptions  of  Rome,  Radicalism,  Ration- 
alism in  all  its  forms,  the  various  phases  of  imperfect  theology,  as 
well  as  against  every  school  of  anti-Christian  philosophy."  *     While 


*  Conservative  Ref.  p.  255. 


726 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  727 

truth  is  consistent  in  its  unvarying  opposition  to  error  in  all  its  pro- 
tean forms  it  does  not  decline  to  acknowledge  truth  wherever 
found.  Fidelity  to  itself  is  its  highest  governing  principle.  All  can 
be  done  and  endured  that  does  not  involve  a  sacrifice  of  itself  It 
has  allies  in  Rome,  Geneva,  and  Oxford,  and  recognizing  the  posi- 
tion of  supreme  importance  it  occupies,  is  as  ready  to  question  the 
dicta  of  philosophy  as  those  of  theology.  But  to  conclude  a  con- 
cordat with  error  under  whatever  form  or  name  it  may  assume,  or 
whatever  be  the  character  of  the  associations  in  which  it  may  be 
found,  would  be  to  jeopardize  its  own  life.  To  truth  self-consistency 
is  the  highest  law. 

The  phraseology  of  the  article  as  expressed  in  the  Latin  and  Ger- 
man involves  shades  of  meaning  which,  while  not  contradictory, 
may  yet  claim  attention  in  our  analysis.  The  precise  extension  of 
the  word  "  nature"  as  employed  in  the  Latin  in  the  clause,  "  God 
creates  and  preserves  nature,"  is  not  at  first  view  entirely  apparent. 
The  immediate  connection  would  indicate  a  restricted  meaning,  con- 
fining the  word  to  human  nature;  God  preserves  the  nature  in 
which  sin  originates,  and  through  which  it  is  traduced.  The  import 
of  the  German  in  the  article  is  wholly  comprehensive.  "  God  hath 
created  and  preserveth  the  whole  universal  nature "  (die  ganze 
Natur)."  That  a  real  difference  in  the  thought  finds  expression 
here  is  by  no  means  asserted.  What  in  the  one  is  stated  most  con- 
cisely is  in  the  other  given  in  language  which  refers  the  divine  pre- 
servation to  all  that  God  has  created.  That  this  is  the  true  sense 
of  the  term  most  accurately  harmonizes  with  the  article  as  a  whole, 
and  at  the  same  time  excludes  as  the  cause  of  sin,  not  only  God  him- 
.self,  but  all  that  he  has  created,  nature  in  its  universal  extent,  refer- 
ring its  origin  solely  and  entirely  to  the  will  of  the  rational  creature. 
While  this  Article  was  framed  "  expressly  for  the  purpose  of  deny- 
ing the  divine  causation  of  sin,  and  for  refuting  the  imputations  of 
Catholic  opponents,"  it  was  framed  in  language  that  opposes  the 
concealed  Materialism  no  less  than  the  Pelagianism  of  the  Romish 
system.  Nor  does  it  any  less  reach  and  exclude  the  Pantheism  of 
some  of  the  earlier  scholastics.  The  "division  of  nature"  made  by 
Scotus  Erigena  is  essentially  that  of  Spinoza,  and  serves  as  the  basis 
of  most  of  the  later  forms  of  Pantheism.  Evangelical  Protestantism 
as  formulated  at  Augsburg  is  scarcely  less  characterized  by  its  far- 
reaching  comprehensiveness  in  the  exclusion  of  error  than  in  the 


728  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

purity  and  clearness  with  which  it  expresses  the  truths  of  Holy- 
Scripture  touching  the  central  articles  of  the  Christian  faith. 

The  aim  of  the  confessors  is  strictly  evangelical  and  practical,  and 
while  keeping  in  view  as  immeasurably  more  important  than  all 
else  their  living  testimony  to  the  pure  word  of  God,  the  truth  they 
held  and  defended  anticipates  and  excludes  the  errors  philosophical 
and  speculative  of  the  subsequent  ages.  Standing  in  living  connec- 
tion with  the  early  church,  and  with  the  true  church  in  every  suc- 
ceeding period,  in  the  pure  faith  of  the  Gospel,  they  no  less  really 
witness  against  the  error  and  heresy  which  have  grown  up  in  and 
alongside  the  earthly  form  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Theirs  is  a 
confession  of  truth,  that  revealed  truth  which  is  in  its  very  nature 
central  and  exclusive,  living  and  powerful,  reaching  alike  to  the  past 
and  into  the  future,  and  vindicating  its  authority  by  a  consistent 
testimony  through  all  the  ages.  What  may  not  have  been  con- 
sciously in  the  mind  of  the  confessors  was  yet  present  in  the  truth 
to  which  they  had  pledged  their  lives,  and  in  the  defense  of  this  they 
stood  the  avowed  enemies  of  error  in  all  its  forms.  And  so  to  un- 
derstand and  defend  their  testimony  is  directly  in  the  interest  of  a 
true  historic  development. 

Viewed  in  this  light  the  clause  of  the  Article  under  consideration 
involves  the  theistic  conception  concerning  the  origin  and  continued 
preservation  and  government  of  the  universe  of  nature.  God,  by  a 
free,  direct,  conscious  act  of  will  brought  into  being  all  that  has  ex- 
istence apart  from  himself  And  he  no  less  certainly  preserves,  or 
constantly  upholds  and  continues  in  being  the  universe  he  has  cre- 
ated. Creation  involves  and  logically  necessitates  providence,  which 
is  in  its  nature  a  continued  creation.  The  eternity,  or  the  self- 
existence  of  the  creature  contradicts  alike  reason  and  fact. 

The  clause,  "which  will,  God  not  aiding"  ("non  adjuvante  Deo"), 
to  which  corresponds  the  German,  "  So  Gott  die  Hand  abgethan," 
does  not,  in  the  two  languages  in  which  the  Confession  was  origin- 
ally framed,  at  first  view  express  the  same  idea.  According  to  the 
former  (the  Latin)  God  in  no  sense,  and  to  no  degree,  participates 
in  the  commission  of  sin.  It  is  the  act  wholly  and  entirely  "of  the 
will  of  the  wicked,"  and,  whether  viewed  in  its  internal  or  external 
aspects,  God  neither  causes  nor  concurs  in  it  in  its  character  as  sin. 
The  German,  when  its  phraseology  is  closely  considered,  appears  to 
view  sin  as  consequent  upon  the  momentary  withdrawal  of  the  di- 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  729 

vine  gracious  power.  The  translator  of  Schalt's  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion renders  this  clause  as  follows:  "Which,  as  soon  as  divine  aid 
is  withdrawn,  turneth  from  God  unto  evil."  The  translator  of  Miil- 
ler's  "  Christian  Doctrine  of  Sin"  turns  the  same  phrase  into  this 
language:  "Which,  when  God  withdrew  his  hand,  turned  from  God 
to  evil."  The  sense  is  the  same  in  both  translations,  and  they  give 
what  certainly  appears  to  be  the  most  natural  and  accurate  meaning 
of  the  original.  That  the  divine  power  does  not  repress  this  act  of 
sin  is  most  certainly  true,  in  which  view  the  same  takes  place  under 
the  permission  of  God.  The  Latin  is  susceptible  of  the  English  ren- 
dering "Without  God's  furthering  this  turning  away  from  him." 
The  German,  however,  will  hardly  bear  a  translation  in  harmony 
with  that  idea.  While  the  words  of  the  one  seem  framed  to  exclude 
the  entire  participation  of  the  divine  action  in  the  production  of  sin, 
the  other  most  naturally  accounts  for  sin  by  the  withdrawal  of  that 
grace,  without  which  man,  even  in  his  primeval  innocence,  could  do 
nothing  good.  It  is  most  certainly  true  that  the  grace  of  God  was 
an  essential  constituent  factor  of  man  prior  to  the  fall.  Neither 
grace  nor  righteousness  was  a  domwi  sttpcradditiim  to  the  first 
Adam,  as  Scholasticism  avers.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  created  in 
righteousness  with  grace  as  the  distinguishing  basis  of  his  nature. 
The  momentary  withdrawal  of  that  grace  would  necessitate  the  fall, 
and  thus  make  God,  at  least  indirectly,  the  author  of  sin.  Accord- 
ing to  this  view  God  decrees  sin,  and  brings  it  into  existence  in  the 
way  of  his  own  ordering.  This  is  itself  Supralapsarianism.  It  de- 
nies the  conclusion  logically  following  its  own  premises,  but  not 
without  precipitating  an  age-long  controversy  in  the  interest  of  a 
theory  at  variance  alike  with  the  word  of  God  and  the  conscience  of 
man. 

It  is  not  denied  that  the  varying  language  of  these  two  copies  ot 
our  Confession  may  be  so  construed  as  to  harmonize  with  each 
other.  But  to  purchase  such  a  reconciliation  by  sacrificing  the 
plainest  principles  of  criticism  cannot  be  allowed,  much  less  com- 
mended. That  the  views  of  Melanchthon  underwent  a  change 
touching  truths  closely  related  to  that  contained  in  this  article  is 
quite  easily  shown.  The  statement  is  made  by  Julius  Miiller  that 
"from  the  year  1532,  in  the  new  edition  of  his  commentary  on  Ro- 
mans, "  he  began  to  break  through  the  magic  circle  whose  primary 
premise   is  unconditional  predestination."     In   the  Variata  he   puts 


730  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

contra  mandata  Dei  for  non  adjuvante  Deo,  which  cannot  be  re- 
garded as  an  explanation.  To  understand  them  as  synonymous,  or 
to  employ  them  interchangeably,  would  be  to  violate  the  morality 
of  language.  It  is  well  known  that  the  German  of  the  Confession 
in  the  Book  of  Concord  is  only  a  copy  of  the  original  of  Melanch- 
thon,  and  made  before  that  Confession  had  assumed  the  exact  form 
in  which  it  was  actually  presented  to  the  Diet  It  is  not  affirmed 
that  the  discrepancy  in  the  clause  under  consideration,  as  this 
appears  in  the  comparison  of  the  two  languages,  is  due  to  the 
less  mature  character  of  the  German  copy.  It  cannot,  however, 
be  denied  that,  in  their  earlier  experience  as  Reformers,  both  Lu- 
ther and  Melanchthon  were  profoundly  influenced  by  the  study  of 
Augustine.  Turning  away  from  the  Pelagianism  of  Rome,  and  the 
loose  morality  naturally  growing  from  its  entire  system  of  work- 
righteousness,  these  earnest  spirits  sought  communion  with  the  early 
Christian  Fathers,  among  whom  none  was  entitled  to  more  venera- 
tion than  the  pious,  learned  and  able  bishop  of  Hippo.  That  his 
views  concerning  predestination  were  entertained  in  the  earlier  stages 
of  the  Reformation,  as  well  as  his  teaching  touching  sin  and  grace, 
appears  prominently  in  their  writings.  According  to  Augustine  the 
divine  "  predetermination  presupposes  the  free  act  of  man  by  which 
sin  gains  an  entrance  into  human  nature."  It  came  within  the 
range  of  the  divine  foreknowledge,  although  that  foreknowledge  pos- 
sesses no  causative  force.  In  this  respect  his  view  resembles  that  of 
the  late  Infralapsarians.  While  the  Supralapsarianism  of  the  Synod 
of  ,Dort  may  be  the  logical  result  of  the  principles  of  Augustine, 
reaching  the  absolute  extreme  that  the  Fall  was  decreed  of  God,  the 
clearly  expressed  views  of  the  African  bishop  stand  in  open  opposi- 
tion to  this  latter  development.  That  the  Augsburg  Confession,  as 
also  the  later  symbols  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  is  in  direct  antagon- 
ism to  the  Dordrecht  deliverance  on  this  subject  demands  no  proof 
at  our  hands.  And  that  an  unconditional  or  absolute  predestina- 
tion of  men  to  salvation  and  eternal  life  is  taught  or  implied  in  the 
Lutheran  confessional  writings  can  only  be  maintained  by  those 
who  are  intent  rather  upon  new  issues  than  satisfied  with  holding 
fast  that  which  they  have.  Nothing  of  this  error,  nor  indeed  of 
kindred  errors,  lies  even  in  concealment,  in  the  phraseology  under 
consideration.  But  the  form  of  expression  contained  in  the  German 
certainly  needs  to  be  interpreted  in  the  clearer  light  of  the  Latin 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  73 1 

original.  This  latter  gives  expression  to  the  fuller,  and,  as  regards 
form,  more  correct  thought  of  the  Confessors,  and  is  that  which  finds 
more  complete  statement  in  the  later  symbols  of  the  Church.  The 
German  indicates  a  less  mature  development  in  the  line  of  dogmatic 
thought  and  formulae.  Had  these  faithful  witnesses  for  the  truth 
possessed  more  time  for  the  preparation  of  our  Confession,  its  form, 
matchless  as  it  is  for  simplicity,  and  perspicuity,  would  have  under- 
gone still  further  changes.  That  these  would  have  reached  and» 
affected  the  clause  before  us  cannot  be  affirmed.  It  is  maintained 
that  the  apparent  discrepancy  is  removed  by  keeping  in  mind  the 
special  aim  of  the  Confessors  in  this  article,  viz.,  that  they  had  in 
view  actual  sins  more  particularly,  as  the  outworking  of  original  or 
originating  sin. 

By  the  doctrine  of  justification  through  faith  they  penetrated  to 
the  heart  of  the  Romish  system,  and  discovered  its  deep  corruption. 
In  its  desperate  defence  the  Papacy  charged  upon  the  Reformers, 
that,  in  denying  the  meritorious  value  of  good  works,  they  en- 
couraged sinning,  and  depreciated  holiness.  It  was  then,  and  is  still 
alleged,  that  to  impute  righteousness  to  the  sinner  would  be  an  im- 
putation upon  the  holiness  of  God.  In  the  fresh  and  exultant  joy 
of  Luther  over  the  fear  of  death  and  hell  they  profess  to  see  an  in- 
difference to  sin  and  sanctification.  And  in  that  confusion  and 
unquietness  which  surely  follow  upon  "envy  and  strife"  they  were 
alike  ready  to  defame  God  and  his  servants,  if  they  might  only  main- 
tain their  own  wicked  cause.  Against  such  malice  and  falsehood 
these  godly  men  defended  both  God  and  his  truth.  Sin,  wherever 
found,  and  by  whomsoever  committed,  Was  not  of  God,  but  of  the 
will  of  the  wicked.  While  he  preserved  and  upheld  nature  he  did 
not  cause,  nor  concur  in  the  sintul  act.  The  will  is  not  aided  by 
him  in  its  actual  alienation.  Sin  is  the  product  of  the  will  in  its 
estranged  acts.  When  his  hand  is  withdrawn  it  turns  from  God. 
Whether  this  be  understood  in  the  sense,  that  he  does  not  by  his 
power  prevent  the  sin,  but  permits  it;  or  that  he  stands  entirely 
apart  from  participation  in  the  sinful  act.  The  language  is  strong  and 
positive  in  its  affirmation  of  the  holiness  of  God.  He  might  prevent 
the  act  of  murder,  and  by  an  exercise  of  his  power  palsy  the  arm 
that  is  lifted  against  the  life  of  a  fellow  man;:  or  by  his  wisdom  he 
could  frustrate  that  wicked  purpose.  If  he  does  neither,  the  mur- 
derous act  is  wholly  that  of  the  man.  Morally  God  is  infinitely 
removed  from  any  participation  in  the  deed  committed. 


732  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

But  this  restricted  application  of  the  Article  to  actual  sin,  even 
should  it  be  justified  or  demanded,  does  not  confine  the  truth  to  sins 
of  this  nature.  And  since  it  has  reference  to  the  cause,  of  sin,  and 
not  to  its  nature,  we  are  sure  that  its  most  comprehensive  applica- 
tion to  the  origin  of  sin  in  general  is  justified  by  the  spirit  of  the 
Article. 

That  the  clause,  "the  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  wicked,"  does 
not  imply  that  these  were  originally  wicked,  is  evident  from  the  lan- 
guage just  considered.  Neither  in  the  case  of  the  unfallen  creature 
does  the  will  become  wicked  before  it  commits  sin.  The  state  of  the 
will  is  antecedent  to  all  acts  of  the  will,  internal  and  external,  but  in 
the  case  of  Adam's  fall  that  act  did  at  the  same  time  constitute  the 
"turning  away  from  God,"  the  transition  from  a  condition  of  holi- 
ness to  one  of  sinfulness.  When  the  first  sin  was  conceived,  and 
before  it  came  to  the  birth,  it  was  the  product,  the  act  of  the  will, 
which  in  that  very  instance  became  wicked.  The  truth  of  the  state- 
ment is  based  upon  the  nature  of  the  will  of  him  whom  God  made 
upright,  even  "  in  his  own  image." 

It  is  equally  true  that  this  Article  contains  a  general  statement 
which  is  applicable  to  sin  in  all  its  subsequent  forms.  Touching  its 
cause,  whether  in  the  angel  world,  in  the  fall  of  Adam,  or  in  the  de- 
praved condition  of  his  posterity  in  its  fixed  state  of  alienation  from 
the  divine  law,  sin  originates  in  "  the  will  of  the  wicked."  It  owes 
its  existence  at  first  to  thjs  source,  and  having  secured  place  in  hu- 
man nature,  as  well  as  in  the  universe  of  God,  it  continues  to  become, 
to  live  and  grow,  in  the  perverted  will  of  the  moral  creature.  The 
language  is  generic  in  character,  containing  an  all-embracing  decla- 
ration concerning  the  cause  of  sin. 

We  have  again  in  this  Article  a  most  striking  instance  of  the 
strictly  practical  aim  of  the  Confessors.  No  subject  has  excited 
more  profound  and  earnest  thought,  philosophical  or  speculative. 
The  mightiest  intellects  of  many  of  the  best  men  have  struggled 
long  and  patiently  in  order  to  make  clear  to  themselves  the  origin 
of  this  mystery,  and  to  harmonize  its  possibility  or  permission  with 
the  power  and  holiness  of  God.  Of  these  not  a  few  have  returned 
from  their  researches,  acknowledging  their  inability  to  solve  the 
problem  they  had  undertaken.  None  of  these  indeed  charge  the 
existence  of  sin  directly  to  God  himself,  yet  how  it  originated? 
whence  ?    and  why  ?    are  beyond  their  power   to  determine.     But 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN,  J  T^T^ 

none  of  these  questions  trouble  the  Confessors.  They  cannot  be 
drawn  aside  into  speculative  disquisitions,  however  interesting  or  in- 
viting they  may  appear,  or  suffer  themselves  to  be  lured  from  the 
serious  end  they  have  in  view.  Their  aim  is  wholly  moral  and  prac- 
tical. Guided  by  their  reverence  for  the  divine  word,  and  in  their 
supreme  desire  to  know  and  confess  it,  they  proceed  at  once  to  the 
heart  of  the  subject,  reaching  the  positive  statement,  that,  not  God, 
but  the  "will  of  the  wicked"  is  the  cause  of  sin.  The  conclusion 
reached  is  not  by  way  of  philosophy,  or  human  speculation.  It  is 
in  no  sense  excogitated,  or  thought  out  independently  of  the  posi- 
tive and  clear  utterances  of  the  word  of  revelation.  Rather,  yea 
altogether,  is  it  found  in  that  word  after  diligent  and  pious  searching, 
and  their  labor  is  confined  to  that  of  discovering  the  clearest  and 
truest  human  expression  for  what  God  has  revealed  concerning  it. 
The  results  attained  must  be  held  to  harmonize  with  those  of  a  true 
philosophy,  but  beginning  at  the  centre,  and  resting  satisfied  with 
the  facts  as  there  made  known,  they  leave  to  the  former  its  circuit- 
ous method  of  finding  truth.  They  need  fear  no  conflict  with  phil- 
osophy who  are  guided  by  the  word  of  God.  All  truth  and  fact  are 
practical,  existing  for  moral  ends.  These  confessors  at  Augsburg 
revered  the  divinely  given  word  supremely.  This  was  the  source 
and  the  conditioning  law  of  all  their  investigations  and  conclusions. 
To  know  what  that  said  and  required,  and  faithfully  to  formulate 
the  same  as  the  rule  of  life  and  faith,  was  the  one  design  animating 
them  in  their  patient  labors.  With  how  much  of  authority  should 
not  this  fact  clothe  their  utterances  ! 

Concerning  the  positive  statement  of  the  article  proper,  it  is 
affirmed  that  "  God  creates  and  preserves  nature."  God  creates. 
This  is  over  against  Atheism,  which  altogether  denies  the  Divine 
existence,  and  affirms  the  eternity  of  matter.  There  can  be  no 
creation  where  there  is  no  God.  The  language  is  just  as  certainly 
exclusive  of  all  forms  of  Pantheism,  earlier  and  later.  Neither  uni- 
versal substance,  nor  universal  thought,  is  the  underlying  entity  or 
cause  of  all  things.  To  Pantheism  God  is  no  more  than  a  name  for 
the  unseen,  unconscious  forces  operating  by  necessity  in  nature. 
God  posses.ses  neither  freedom  nor  personality.  "To  my  mind  God 
is  the  immanent  (that  is,  the  intramundane),  and  not  the  transcend- 
ent (that  is,  the  supramundane),  cause  of  all  things;  that  is,  the 
totality  of  finite  objects  is  posited  in  the  essence  of  God ;  and  not  in 


734  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

his  wiliy^  According  to  this  view  God  exists  of  necessity  in  the 
world,  and  possesses  no  living  activity  out  of  and  beyond  it.  There 
is  here  no  room  for  creation,  for  a  free  creative  "  let  there  be." 
All  is  bound  in  an  endless  chain  of  causation,  and  from  eternity  to 
eternity  substance  and  form  constitute  the  whole  of  universal  neces- 
sary existence.  This  theory,  logical  enough,  if  its  fundamental  pre- 
mise, viz.,  that  of  the  existence  of  universal  substance,  be  admitted, 
is  dishonoring  alike  to  God,  and  the  free  creature,  man.  There  can 
be  no  creation  in  the  absolute  and  only  true  sense  of  the  term  when 
there  is  no  free  personal  God.  Materialism,  in  its  denial  of  the  ex- 
istence of  spirit,  is  likewise  led  to  deny,  and  logically,  the  fact  of 
creation.  Nothing  exists  save  matter,  and  this  forever.  Neither 
God  nor  spiritual  personality  has  place  in  this  system,  and  upon 
this  basis  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  creation  would  be  to  contra- 
dict the  axiom  "ex  nihilo  nihil  fit." 

It  is  also  affirmed  in  the  Article  that  God  "  preserves  universal 
nature."  This  is  over  against  the  varying  forms  of  Deism  and  Ra- 
tionalism. The  whole  texture  of  the  Article  under  review  consists 
with  the  doctrine  of  a  constant,  active  providence  of  God  in  the 
world  he  has  made.  As  this  came  into  being  through  an  omnipo- 
tent act  of  God,  its  existence  is  that  of  created  dependence  upon  its 
author.  The  universe  considered  as  a  whole,  or  in  its  several  parts, 
is  not  a  structure  so  perfect  as  to  be  able  to  continue  apart  from  the 
upholding  hand  that  gave  it  being.  The  power  calling  it  into  exist- 
ence lives  in  and  sustains  it  through  every  succeeding  moment. 
Even  what  are  known  as  inherent  laws  and  forces  of  nature  are  no 
more  than  living  modes  of  the  divine  activity,  continuing  and  con- 
ditioning all  that  exists.  Deism  is  justly  chargeable  with  prime  in- 
consistency in  allowing  a  miracle  at  the  commencement  of  the  world, 
and  then  affirming  the  divine  indifference  or  inactivity  in  its  subse- 
quent existence.  God  could  not,  as  he  would  not,  create  and  leave 
alone.  This  would  contradict  both  his  being  and  work.  In  main- 
taining the  fact  and  the  necessity  of  the  preservation  of  nature  by 
God,  these  Reformers  affirmed  a  truth  in  keeping  with  the  highest 
philosophy,  no  less  than  with  the  uniform  teachings  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. 

It  is  not  asserted  that  these  afifirmations  are  made  with  these  or 
other  kindred  errors  in  mind.     They  scarcely  had  existence  as  for- 

*  Spinoza. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  735 

Ululated  systems  at  the  time  when  our  Confession  was  framed.  The 
errors  against  which  the  Article  was  directed  were  practical  in  their 
form  and  nature.  They  lived  in  the  church,  and  were  excluded  by 
the  word  and  spirit  of  the  revelation  of  God.  Against  these  the 
Article  was  specially  and  primarily  aimed.  But  truth  is  all-perva- 
sive and  all-comprehensive.  It  reaches  beyond  the  consciousness 
of  those  who  confess  it.  All  ages  and  systems  belong  to  its  domain. 
The  errors  of  the  past  are  discovered,  and  those  of  the  future  antici- 
pated, while  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  may  be  present  to  the 
mind  of  its  witnesses.  Moving  exclusively  in  the  circle  of  what 
was  revealed  for  human  life  and  salvation,  the  Confessors  stood  in  a 
living  centre  whose  periphery  was  all-inclusive.  Error  has  appeared 
in  new  forms,  and  may  continue  to  deck  itself  in  garish  colors  of 
which  they  knew  and  thought  nothing.  But  living  and  abiding  in 
that  truth  which  is  in  its  very  nature  omnipresent,  and  which  they 
held  and  confessed,  is  concealed  latent  or  open  opposition  to  every 
error.  Thus  do  these  men  of  God,  and  their  brethren  of  every  age, 
stand  as  the  defenders  and  witnesses  of  the  truth. 

But,  returning  to  the  more  special  thought  of  the  clause  of  the 
Article  before  us,  we  find  here  the  cause  of  nature  and  that  of  sin 
placed  in  the  sharpest  possible  contrast.  The  point  of  the  affirma- 
tion is  to  distinguish  between  the  cause  of  sin  in  the  moral  creature, 
and  God  who  creates  and  sustains  all  things.  This  upholding  power 
of  God  certainly  extends  to  "all  and  singular"  that  he  has  made. 
It  is  not  to  nature  apart  from  man  that  the  divine  preservation  is 
limited.  Neither  is  it  to  the  body  in  its  functions  apart  from  the 
mind  that  God  extends  his  care  and  providence.  All  are  alike  de- 
pendent upon  him,  since  he  made  all.  His  arm  is  as  active  in  sus- 
taining, as  his  eye  watchful  in  guiding  his  works.  Self-dependence 
characterizes  nothing,  yea,  is  possible  to  nothing  created.  To  create 
and  leave  alone  would  be  to  uncreate;  or  to  impart  to  the  creature 
a  divine  attribute.  That  God  could  not  do  ;  it  would  involve  a  con- 
tradiction both  in  the  act  and  the  author.  The  very  will  in  its  sin- 
ning is  sustained  by  God.  Were  he  to  withdraw  his  hand,  even 
from  the  wicked  in  their  wickedness,  they  would  instantly  cease  to 
exist.  Is  it  not  true,  that  the  providence  of  God  reaches  its  highest 
and  most  distinguishing  activity  in  the  preservation  of  the  will  even 
in  ^ts  apostate  condition?  That  it  should  embrace  the  corporeal 
nature  of  the  moral  creature,  which  is  the  merely  unconscious  organ 


736  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  the  mind,  of  the  will,  is  not  so  high  and  singular  an  exhibition  of 
the  divine  activity.  But  that  the  will,  even  in  its  perverted  acts  and 
state,  yea,  that  even  devils  are  included  in  this  all-searching,  all-en- 
compassing divine  energy,  is  surely  to  exhaust  no  less  the  powers 
of  conception  and  language  in  the  endeavor  to  comprehend  and  ex- 
press it.  How  clear  and  vast  the  thought  of  the  Psalmist :  "  If  I 
ascend  up  into  heaven,  thou  art  there;  if  I  make  my  bed  in  hell, 
behold  thou  art  there.  If  I  take  the  wings  of  the  morning,  and 
dwell  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  sea ;  even  there  shall  thy  hand 
lead  me,  and  thy  rigJit  hand  shall  hold  nieT 

The  truth  involved  in  the  negative  statement,  God  is  not  the 
cause  of  sin,  is  universally  accepted.  No  system  maintains  the  op- 
posite, certainly  none  that  admits  the  reality  of  sin,  or  that  it  is  op- 
posed to  and  hated  of  God.  On  the  contrary,  the  various  methods 
of  explaining  its  origin,  and  of  reconciling  its  existence  with  the 
goodness  and  justice  of  God,  are  largely  devised  and  employed  in 
order  to  protect  him  against  this  very  imputation.  However  much  of 
the  logic  of  theologians  and  philosophers  may  have  been  at  fault  in 
the  reasoning  employed  to  uphold  and  define  their  systems,  none 
has  charged  God  with  being  the  author  of  sin.  Conscience  and 
reason  alike  testify  to  the  holiness  of  the  divine  character,  albeit  the 
divine  being  may  be  regarded  both  powerless  and  indifferent  con- 
cerning its  existence.  And  with  this  testimony  harmonize  through- 
out the  teachings  of  Holy  Scripture.  That  God  is  intrinsically  holy, 
that  he  hates  sin  with  a  perfect  hatred,  and  that  it  exists  in  the  most 
complete  and  absolute  contrast  to  his  very  nature  and  being,  is  ap- 
parent upon  every  page  of  our  inspired  scriptures.  These  are  no 
less  a  revelation  of  sin  than  of  salvation,  and  in  both  are  displayed 
the  all-searching  holiness  of  our  God.  Dwelling  "  in  light  unto 
which  no  man  can  approach,"  yet  existing  in  and  sustaining  all  that 
he  has  made,  "he  cannot  look  upon  sin,"  and  hates  it  with  an  infinite 
hatred.  The  law  given  on  Sinai  was  such  an  embodiment  and 
revelation  of  the  holiness  of  God  that  sinning  and  rebellious  Israel 
was  led  to  exclaim,  "  Let  not  God  speak  with  us,  lest  we  die."  To 
make  evident  this  attribute  of  his  being  to  his  chosen  people,  as  also 
to  the  nations  who  were  left  to  walk  in  their  own  ways,  God  visited 
them  with  the  most  fearful  punishments,  threatening  them  even  with 
impending  destruction.  There  are  in  fact  not  a  few  passages  in  the 
Psalms  and  Prophets,  which  seem  to  reveal   God  in  the  aspect  of  a 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  '] '^y'] 

being  who  delights  in  vengeance  upon  his  creatures,  one  who  takes 
pleasure  in  hearing  the  impotent  cries,  and  in  beholding  the  hapless 
victims  of  his  rigorous  justice.  The  complete  destruction  of  the 
Canaanites,  the  overthrow  of  nation  by  nation,  marked  by  remorse- 
less, unrelenting  war  and  bloodshedding,  and  this  constituting  so 
large  a  portion  of  the  history  of  ancient  nations  ;  the  repeated  and 
severe  punishment  sent  upon  \  is  own  people — all  appear  as  so  many 
evidences  of  an  almighty,  yet  vindictive  being,  who  finds  delight  in 
causing  suffering  and  death.  But  what  are  these  more  than  the 
just  judgment  of  a  God  who  "  cannot  look  upon  sin,"  whose  very 
wrath  is  the  pure  expression  of  holiness,  and  all  of  whose  goings 
forth  are  in  the  interest  and  defense  of  truth  and  righteousness. 
Ours  is  a  race  whose  history  is  characterized  by  apostasy  and  posi- 
tive rebellion  against  God.  This  constitutes  the  dark  background 
to  all  the  suffering,  the  punishment,  the  wars  of  extermination  that 
have  been  allowed  and  sent  of  God  upon  individuals  and  nations. 
And  to  fail  of  comprehending  history  in  the  light  of  this  truth  is  to 
fail  to  understand  aright  both  God  and  history.  According  to  this 
view  the  history  of  the  world  is  its  judgment.  How  then  could 
God  cause  that  which  he  so  hates?  Could  he  so  array  his  actions 
against  his  being  as  to  direct  his  entire  revelation  of  himself,  in  his- 
tory, no  less  than  in  his  word,  against  that  to  which  he  gave  exist- 
ence? Since  the  one  truth  he  seeks  to  impress  upon  his  creatures 
is  that  of  his  infinite  holiness,  his  absolute  hatred  of  sin  in  nature 
and  act,  surely  its  origin  cannot  be  found  in  him.  Nay,  even  that 
which  he  seeks  to  produce  in  his  moral  creatures  is  a  will  like  to 
that  of  his  own,  which  is  averse  to  sin.  Not  content  with  guarding 
the  holiness  of  his  own  character  against  all  sin,  he  is  infinitely  ac- 
tive in  the  work  of  counteracting  its  presence  and  influence  in  the 
world  he  has  made  and  preserves.  "The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  to  hate 
sin."  By  the  fear  of  the  Lord  men  depart  from  evil."  "A  wise 
man  feareth,  and  departeth  fiom  evil."  "As  obedient  children, 
not  fashioning  yourselves  according  to  the  former  lusts  in  your  ig- 
norance :  but  as  he  which  hath  called  you  is  holy,  so  be  ye  holy  in 
all  manner  of  conversation;  because  it  is  written,  Be  ye  holy;  for  I 
am  holy."  "  Let  no  man  say  when  he  is  tempted,  I  am  tempted  of 
God  ;  for  God  cannot  be  tempted  with  evil,  neither  temptcth  he  any 
man."  But  why  multiply  passages  from  a  book  whose  prime  claim 
to  authenticity  and  credibility  is  the  holiness  of  God,  and  his  abso- 
lute separateness  from  sin  ? 


7^S  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

And  just  as  certainly  are  all  the  works  of  God,  as  originally  made 
by  him,  good,  created  without  sin.  Evil  does  not  exist  as  the  mere 
limitation  or  imperfection  of  the  creature,  for  "  God  made  man 
upright."  He  cannot  himself  be  holy  if  he  gave  being  to  a  creature 
to  whom  sin  is  in  any  sense  or  to  any  degree  a  necessity.  When 
Adam  came  from  his  hand  he  was  pure  from  all  evil,  a  just  moral 
reflection  of  his  maker.  The  world,  when  created,  was  pronounced 
by  God,  in  its  parts,  and  as  a  whole,  "very  good."  He  no  more 
caused  sin  in  his  work,  in  anything  created,  than  he  is  himself  sin- 
ful. Existence  in  all  its  forms,  conscious  and  unconscious,  matter 
and  spirit,  was,  when  made,  "  very  good."  To 'be  the  cause,  even 
indirectly,  of  sin  in  the  creature,  would  involve,  and  inexorably,  sin- 
fulness in  himself  "  God  cannot  be  tempted  of  evil,"  and  therefore 
cannot  produce  it  in  another. 

These  statements  do  not  need  confirmation  from  any  other  source. 
They  stand  so  clearly  in  the  light  of  scripture  and  reason,  and  so 
bear  witness  to  their  own  truthfulness,  that  they  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned. And  yet  in  a  paper  of  this  character  it  is  deemed  both 
relevant  and  just  to  adduce  the  testimony  of  later  confessors  and 
theologians.  In  the  Epitome,  under  the  Article  concerning  original 
sin,  the  rejection  and  condemnation  of  the  Manichaean  heresy,  as 
then  held  by  Flacius,  is  expressed  in  this  language  :  "  We  reject  and 
condemn  also  as  a  Manichaean  error,  the  doctrine  that  original  sin 
is  properly,  and  without  any  distinction,  the  substance,  nature,  and 
essence  itself  of  the  corrupt  man,  so  that  no  distinction  between  the 
corrupt  nature,  considered  by  itself,  since  the  Fall,  and  original  sin, 
can  be  conceived  of,  nor  can  they  be  conceived  of  even  in  thought." 
Again :  "  The  distinction  between  God's  work  and  that  of  the  devil 
is  thereby  designated  in  the  clearest  way,  because  the  devil  can 
create  no  substance,  but  can  only  in  an  accidental  way,  from  God's 
decree  (God  permitting)  corrupt  a  substance  created  by  God."  And 
under  the  treatment  of  the  same  Article  in  the  "Solid  Declaration  " 
we  have  statements  alike  clear  and  specific.  While  Manichaeism 
did  not  affirm  that  God  was  the  author  of  sin,  yet  in  maintaining 
that  it  is  a  necessary  property  of  matter  it  did  implicate  him  in  its 
existence,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Scriptures  as  held  and  be- 
lieved by  these  Confessors.  The  rejection  of  the  error  of  Flacius 
was  a  direct  vindication  of  the  holiness  of  the  divine  character.  To 
regard  sin  either  as  a  substance,  or  as  an  assential  property  of  nature, 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  739 

was  to  impair  the  perfect  holiness  of  God.  These  later  Confessions 
are  replete  with  similar  declarations  equally  emphatic. 

The  individual  utterances  of  our  theologians  stand  in  singularly 
clear  agreement  with  these  confessional  statements.  In  fact,  how 
like  commentaries  upon  these  symbols  do  they  appear  throughout? 
"God  is  not  the  cause  of  sin,  nor  is  sin  a  thing  continued  or  or- 
dained by  him,  but  it  is  a  horrible  destruction  of  the  divine  work 
and  order."*  "God  is  in  no  manner  the  efficient  cause  of  sin; 
neither  in  part  nor  in  whole,  neither  directly  nor  indirectly,  neither 
accidentally  nor  really  {^per  se)  {per  accidens) ;  whether  in  the  forms 
of  Adam's  transgressions  or  in  that  of  any  other  sin,  God  is  not, 
neither  can  he  be  called,  the  cause  or  author  of  sin.  God  is  not  the 
cause  of  sin,  (i)  physically  and  per  se,  because  thus  the  evil  or  sin 
has  no  cause;  (2)  nor  morally,  by  commanding,  persuading,  or 
approving,  because  he  does  not  desire  sin,  but  hates  it;  nor  (3)  by 
way  of  accident,  because  nothing  can  happen  to  God  either  by  chance 
or  fatuitously.  This  conflicts  with  the  divine  wisdom,  prescience, 
goodness,  holiness,  and  independence,  as  is  proved  from  Ps.  v.  5  ; 
xlv.  7;  Is.  Ixv.  12;  Zech.  viii.  17;  I  John  i.  5;  James  i.  13,  17."! 
Verily,  "  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all." 

Whence  then  is  sin?  How  did  it  originate?  What  is  its  cause? 
These  questions  are  answered  in  the  Article  in  language  at  once 
positive  and  clear.  "The  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  wicked;  to 
wit,  of  the  devil  and  ungodly  men  ;  which  will,  God  not  aiding, 
turneth  itself  from  God."  These  Confessors  are  singularly  careful 
to  maintain  the  sovereign  providence  of  God  over  all  that  he  has 
made,  as  well  as  vindicating  him  against  any  and  all  complicity  in 
the  sin  of  his  creatures.  He  cannot  let  them  pass  from  his  hand  ; 
neither  is  he,  nor  can  he  be,  partaker  in  their  sins.  In  the  clause, 
"  which  will,  God  not  aiding,"  it  is  implied  that  he  preserves  the  will 
of  the  wicked  even  in  its  sinful  state  and  acts.  But  the  sin  itself, 
both  that  of  origin,  and  its  consequences,  is  not  of  God,  but  of  the 
wicked  will  of  the  moral  creature.  Sin  has  its  cause  in  "  the  will 
turning  itself  from  God."  The  language  of  the  Article  taken 
throughout  is  so  framed  as  to  embrace  and  maintain  this  very  truth, 
viz.,  that  the  activity  which  man  perverts  is  of  God.  Distinguishing 
between  the  will  as  to  its  nature  and  essence  as  created  by  God,  and 

*Mel.  Loc.  Theol.     Quoted  from  Schmid's  Dogmatics. 
f  Quenstedt,  in  Schmid's  Dogmatics. 


740  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

its  abuse  or  perversion,  yea  between  the  activity  of  the  will  and  the 
moral  character  of  those  activities,  it  declares  that  God  is  in  no 
sense  the  cause  of  sin.  Between  the  will  considered  as  created  and 
preserved  by  God,  preserved  since  the  fall  no  less  than  before,  and 
sin,  the  distinction  is  clear  and  unmistakable.  In  the  sense  stated, 
God  even  concurs  with  the  will  in  its  sin,  but  not  with  the  sin  itself. 
And  to  impute  this  to  him,  or  to  implicate  him  in  any  manner,  or  to 
any  degree,  with  the  sin  itself  would  be  to  place  oneself  within  the 
range  of  that  declaration  of  the  Christ,  "  the  lie  is  of  the  devil." 

But  still  the  question  recurs,  how  can  a  holy  creature,  much  more 
one  created  holy,  and  created  in  a  state  of  dependence  upon  God — 
how  can  this  one  fall,  and  thereby  cause  sin  ?  To  make  the  answer 
clear  to  the  understanding  is  difficult.  The  question  has  been  a 
perplexing  one  from  the  earliest  times,  and  most  perplexing  to  those 
who  have  thought  and  reasoned  most  profoundly.  It  has  been  in- 
deed a  cnix  of  thought  through  the  ages.  That  it  is  susceptible  of 
complete  rational  demonstration  is  not  indeed  claimed.  This  has 
been  and  will  continue  to  be  an  arena  of  conflict  until  the  unsolved 
problems  of  this  life  stand  out  clearly  in  the  light  of  eternity. 

It  cannot  be  irrelevant  to  refer  to  some  of  the  theories  employed 
to  explain  this  difificulty.  While  these  in  general  contradict  each 
other,  and  cannot  be  maintained  by  those  who  hold  as  authoritative 
the  teachings  of  Scripture,  they  still  testify  to  the  difficult  nature  of 
the  question,  as  well  as  to  the  interest  cherished  by  the  human  mind 
in  reaching  a  conclusion  that  will  satisfy  itself.  That  it  possesses 
more  than  a  speculative  interest  cannot  be  questioned. 

Manichaeism  finds  the  solution  to  the  question  in  two  eternal 
principles.  Evil  has  no  beginning.  Its  existence  in  this  world  is 
only  another  stage  of  that  conflict  with  the  Good  which  has  been  in 
progress  throughout  the  past  eternity.  The  system  itself  had  its 
origin  with  Manes.  While  the  principles  are  no  doubt  older  than 
this  heresiarch,  having  been  borrowed  from  the  Pagan  philosophers 
of  the  pre-Christian  era,  he  was  the  first  to  formulate  the  same  into  a 
system.  Its  theoretical  part,  its  metaphysics,  was  chiefly  derived 
from  the  old  Parsism  ;  its  partical  part,  its  morals,  chiefly  from  the 
neighboring  Buddhism.  From-  Christianity  it  took  only  some  few 
loose  ideas  ;  but  the  whole  method  of  combining  all  those  materials, 
and  fixing  them  into  one  coherent  system,  it  borrowed  from  Gnosti- 
cism.* Beginning  his  mission  about  242  A.  D.  he  gave  himself 
*  See  Manichaeism  in  Schaff-Herzog. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  74 1 

out  as  a  messenger  from  God.  "What  Buddha  was  to  India, 
Zoroaster  to  Persia,  Jesus  to  the  lands  of  the  West,  that  I  am  to 
the  country  of  Babylonia."  The  system  was  not  presented  as  a 
power  to  save  man,  "  but,  like  Gnosticism,  it  simply  proposed  to 
gratify  his  craving  for  knowledge  by  explaining  the  very  problem 
of  his  existence."  Its  fundamental  principle  was  that  of  Dualism. 
The  world  had  its  origin  in  the  accidental  mixing  of  two  absolutely 
contrasting  substances,  or  elements,  the  good  and  evil.  "  The  first 
movement  towards  this  intermingling  arose  from  Satan  within  the 
realm  of  darkness."  To  meet  this  attack  the  Jiomo  primus  was  cre- 
ated by  the  God  of  light,  "  and  all  that  follows,  the  course  of  the  uni- 
verse, the  history  of  the  human  race,  the  life  of  the  individual  soul, 
etc.,  is  nothing  but  a  consistent  evolution  of  this  first  encounter." 
The  feigned  conversation  between  Melissus  and  Zoroaster,  given  by 
Bayle  in  his  Philosophical  Dictionary,  attests  the  strength  of  the 
system  when  its  overthrow  is  undertaken  by  a  priori  reasoning. 
The  argument  of  Melissus,  "  that  the  necessary  Being  is  not  bounded, 
and  therefore  infinite  and  almighty,  and  consequently  one,"  is  well 
met  by  simply  arraying  against  it  the  fact  of  sin  in  the  world.  This 
cannot  have  its  origin  in  God,  who  is  infinitely  good,  and  the  argu- 
ment referring  its  existence  to  an  eternal  principle  of  evil  is  quite  as 
consistent  with  reason,  apart  from  the  word  of  God,  as  that  which 
traces  it  to  an  act  of  the  creature.  But  while  doubting  that  the 
question  can  be  solved  by  arguments  a  priori,  specially  while  reason 
remains  unenlightened  by  revelation,  does  Manichaeism  really  ac- 
count for  the  origin  of  evil?  It  concerns  itself  mainly,  if  not  indeed 
entirely,  with  stating  the  fact  of  the  presence  of  sin  in  the  world, 
accounting  for  its  existence  here  upon  a  hypothesis  devised  to  meet 
the  very  difficulty  in  question.  But  instead  of  furnishing  a  reply  to 
the  inquiry  concerning  the  cause  of  sin,  it  points  to  its  bold  assump- 
tion that  it  existed  forever.  This  is  not  the  ^.rposition  of  the  em- 
barrassing question  at  all;  it  is  plainly  an  ////position  upon  the  moral 
consciousness,  upon  all  serious  reasoning.  Is  it  not  matter  of  re- 
joicing that  we  have  a  positive  answer  in  the  revealed  word,  and  that 
with  this  agrees  the  profoundest  philosophy? 

The  theory   of  the  pre-existence   of  souls    in   an  extra-temporal 

•State  explains  the  origin  of  evil  by  referring  it  to  a  fall  which  took 

place  prior  to  life  in  the  body.     Evil  here  is  only  a  manifestation  ol 

what  occurred  in  an  ante-mundane  apostasy.     Socrates  is  introduced 

48 


742  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  maintaining  it  in  the  Phaedon  of  Plato;  and  it  is  by  him  ascribed 
to  Orpheus  as  its  original  author.  That  it  was  held  by  Plato,  Philo, 
and  from  these  received  and  defended  by  Origen,  is  well  established. 
It  was  part  of  the  theory  of  these,  that  souls  were  incarcerated  in 
bodies  in  this  world  as  a  punishment  for  their  sin  committed  in  a 
pre-existent  state.  Julius  Miiller,  in  his  great  work  on  the  "  Chris- 
tian Doctrine  of  Sin,"  defends  the  same  view,  though  it  is  but  just 
to  him  to  state  that  he  rejects  that  form  of  the  theory  mentioned 
above.  That  the  hypothesis  has  explicit  scriptural  warrant  can 
hardly  be  claimed  by  its  defenders.  It  is  an  assumption  devised 
likewise  to  clear  up  this  mystery  of  sin.  It  is  open  to  the  funda- 
mental objection  to  Manichaeism,  and  is  characterized  by  even  less 
of  consistency.  Replying  to  this  theory,  it  has  been  forcibly  said  : 
"The  hypothesis  merely  draws  the  veil  over  the  great  difficulty  it 
was  designed  to  solve.  The  difficulty  arises,  not  from  the  circum- 
stance that  evil  exists  in  the  present  state  of  our  being,  but  from  the 
fact  that  it  is  found  to  exist  anywhere,  or  in  any  state,  under  the 
moral  administration  of  a  perfect  God.  It  is  as  difficult  to  conceive 
why  such  a  being  should  have  permitted  the  soul  to  sin  in  a  former 
state  of  existence,  even  if  such  a  state  were  an  established  reality, 
as  it  is  to  account  for  its  rise  in  the  present  world.  To  remove  the 
difficulty  out  of  sight,  by  transferring  the  origin  of  evil  beyond 
the  sphere  of  visible  things,  is  a  poor  substitute  for  a  solid  and  sat- 
isfactory solution  of  it.  The  great  problem  of  the  moral  world  is 
not  to  be  illuminated  by  any  such  fictions  of  the  imagination,  and 
we  had  better  let  it  alone  altogether,  if  we  have  nothing  more 
rational  and  solid  to  advance."*  This  is  certainly  an  explanation 
that  stands  in  very  great  need  of  explanation  itself;  and  to  leave  off 
inquiry  just  where  a  true  inquiry  should  begin,  is  to  commit  violence 
both  to  philosophy  and  religion. 

Supralapsarianism  refers  the  Fall,  and  thereby  indirectly  all  sin,  to 
the  divine  decree.  This  decree  was  eternal  and  absolute,  conditioned 
in  no  sense  by  foreknowledge  of  the  acts  of  the  free  creature. 
What  takes  place  in  time  is  no  more  than  the  necessary  unfolding 
of  what  was  proposed  and  existent  in  the  mind  of  God  from  eter- 
nity. The  Fall  was  decreed  as  a  means  to  the  execution  of  the  eter- 
nal counsel  concerning  redemption.       Man  stood  originally  in  and 

*  Bledsoe's  Theodicy. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  743 

by  grace.  His  state  of  dependence  upon  God  was  real  and  com- 
plete. That  Ihe  Fall  might  ensue,  grace  was  withdrawn.  Both  in 
the  angel-world  and  in  this,  the  apostasy  was  necessarily  consequent 
upon  the  temporary  withholding  of  the  divine  gracious  hand.  Here 
indeed  we  have  an  explanation,  but  one  that  makes  God  the  author 
of  sin.  To  the  praise  of  the  defenders  of  this  view  be  it  said,  that 
they  do  most  zealously  repudiate  this  conclusion.  But  in  laying 
down  and  maintaining  the  premises  of  the  argument  they  are  in 
some  just  sense  responsible  for  the  result.  Neither  Calvin,  nor  Beza, 
nor  Edwards,  has  been  able  by  the  arts  or  force  of  logic  to  evade 
that  conclusion.  If  Adam  was  placed  or  left  in  a  state  from  which 
he  could  not  but  fall  into  sin,  and  yet  God  be  in  no  sense  the  author 
of  it,  then  indeed  might  David  plead  that  he  was  not  guilty  of  the 
blood  of  Uriah.  And  as  well  could  a  human  parent  hold  his  help- 
less babe  over  a  precipice,  and  withdraw  his  hand,  suffering  it  to  be 
crushed  to  death  upon  the  rocks  beneath,  and  still  claim  that  he  was 
not  its  murderer,  as  could  the  Almighty  God  bear  his  child  where  it 
must  and  of  necessity  suffer  a  still  greater  fall.  No!  in  rejecting 
the  main  premises,  no  less  than  the  conclusion  of  the  argument,  we 
are  but  vindicating  the  character  of  God  against  the  imputation  that 
he  is  the  cause  of  sin.  Nor  will  we  allow  here  the  misapplication  of 
that  Scripture,  "  Nay  but,  O  man,  who  art  thou  that  repliest  against 
God?"  To  the  declarations  of  that  word  we  yield  implicit  author- 
ity, but  to  its  misuse  in  the  support  of  an  unscriptural  theory,  never. 
There  are  views  of  sin,  growing  from  certain  systems  of  philoso- 
phy, which  may  claim  notice  in  passing.  Materialism  and  Pan- 
theism, the  latter  existing  in  various  modifications,  are  allied  in  this, 
that  they  deny  free  personality  either  to  God  or  man,  as  well  as 
supra- mundane  existence  to  the  former.  These  do  not,  and  cannot, 
admit  the  reality  of  sin  as  sin.  It  exists  as  a  mere  privation,  or  as 
the  necessary  limitation  of  the  rational  creatural  life,  and  makes  the 
inherent  imperfection  that  belongs,  and  essentially,  to  all  that  has 
finite  existence.  According  to  this  view  in  its  varying  phases  the 
fall  was  no  more  than  the  transition  from  a  state  of  nature  to  that  of 
freedom.  Instead  of  regarding  Paradise  as  the  cradle  of  the  human 
race,  around  which  guardian  angels  protectingly  hover,  it  was 
merely  a  park  of  wild  beasts.  Escape  from  it  was  deliverance  from 
a  condition  of  bondage,  and  necessary  that  man  might  attain  to  lib- 
erty.    Sin  is  no  more  than  a  vanishing  point  in  the  development  of 


744  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

consciousness,  or  marking  the  immature  stage  and  condition  in  the 
growth  of  the  creature.  The  names  of  Spinoza,  Hegel,  Fichte, 
stand  in  general  connection  with  this  view.  It  has  been  maintained 
also  by  Schleiermacher  and  Leibnitz,  although  by  the  last  named  in 
a  less  objectionable  form.  These  views  are  in  common  characterized 
by  the  denial,  implied  or  expressed,  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  of  sin. 
And  where  its  cause  is  traced  to  the  will  it  exists  of  necessity  in  the 
very  nature  of  that  will.  The  statement  of  the  article  that  sin  exists 
as  sin,  really  and  essentially,  and  consists  "  in  the  will  of  the  wicked 
turning  away  from  God,"  arrays  itself  against  all  these  speculative 
philosophies.  It  is  not  a  necessity  but  a  perversion  of  the  free 
creature. 

The  article  locates  the  cause  of  sin  "  in  the  will  of  the  wicked." 
That  the  language  expresses  or  implies  a  clear  understanding  of  the 
mystery  of  the  will  in  its  relation  to  sin  is  not  claimed.  Philoso- 
phers of  the  acutest  intellect,  ancient  and  modern,  and  theologians 
possessing  the  profoundest  learning,  as  well  as  the  subtlest  powers 
of  analysis,  have  acknowledged  their  inability  to  master  its  solution. 
This  should  certainly  beget  humility  in  any  one  who  approaches 
the  question.  Human  reason  is  finite,  limited  on  all  sides  to  a  nar- 
row sphere.  He  who  essays  most  in  investigating  difficult  prob- 
lems can  appreciate  that  remark  of  Claudius,  'that  reason  was  given 
in  order  to  show  man  his  ignorance,  as  the  law  to  convince  him  of 
sin.'  Certainly  on  this  question  his  very  best  efforts  fall  short  of 
complete  comprehension.  But  that  we  have  the  truth  in  the  state- 
ment may  be  accepted  with  confidence.  The  cause  cannot  be  in 
God,  for  he  is  intrinsically  holy.  Holiness  guards  all  the  divine 
perfections,  yea,  it  is  the  very  citadel  to  his  being.  It  cannot  be  con- 
crete with  spirit  or  matter,  for  these  likewise  derive  their  existence 
from  him.  Nor  can  it  be  consequent  upon  the  union  of  the  two,  for 
this  would  also  charge  it,  at  least  indirectly,  upon  God.  Nor  is  it 
"  from  the  relationship  of  liberty  to  nature,  nor  from  the  conception 
of  the  world — historical  development  of  liberty,  nor  from  the  divine 
decree,  nor  from  the  created  nor  uncreated,  that  the  necessity  of  evil 
can  be  deduced."  *  Hom^  can  anything  more  than  its  possibility  be 
demonstrated?  Or  where  can  it  be  found,  but  in  the  perversion  of 
the  will  of  the  rational  creature? 

*  Martensen's  Christian  Dogmatics. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  745 

The  difficulties  and  even  objections  that  may  be  alleged  to  this 
view  are  not  valid  against  its  truth.  We  may  and  do  accept  as  true 
what  may  be  open  to  objection.  A  complete  understanding  is  not 
necessary  to  assured  conviction.  That  we  have  truth,  and  are  as- 
sured of  its  possession,  does  not  imply  that  the  intellect  consciously 
holds  it  in  its  completeness.  In  this  state  of  relativity  nothing  ex- 
ists beyond  the  reach  of  a  measure  of  doubt  and  uncertainty.  That 
difficulties  lie  along  the  lines  of  thought  we  may  be  pursuing  would 
not  justify  retreat;  otherwise  skepticism  would  be  the  highest  phi- 
losophy. Variations  in  the  course  of  planets  may  indicate  to  the 
astronomer  the  existence  of  systems  beyond  the  range  of  the  tele- 
scope, but  this  does  not  invalidate  the  accepted  fact  that  our  sun  is 
the  centre  of  the  worlds  to  which  we  are  related.  To  have  and  hold 
truth  as  an  intellectual  possession,  unmixed  with  doubt  of  any  kind 
and  from  any  source,  is  not  possible  in  this  world  of  limitation. 
That  "  we  know  only  in  part "  is  true  of  all  knowledge,  and  to  urge 
this  as  an  objection  would  be  to  claim  for  the  present  state  the  per- 
fection of  that  in  which  we  "  shall  know  even  as  we  are  known." 
That  the  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  wicked  we  maintain  to  be  a 
truth  of  reason  no  less  than  of  faith.  Leaving  these  doubts  to  the 
care  of  those  who  hold  them,  let  us  inquire  somewhat  more  closely 
into  the  cause  of  sin  in  its  relation  to  the  nature  of  will. 

What  is  sin  ?  We  would  not  dare  seek  after  a  better  definition 
than  that  given  in  the  word  of  God,  viz.,  "  sin  is  the  transgression  of 
the  law."  But  as  our  present  inquiry  concerns  the  nature  of  the 
will  in  its  relation  to  sin,  rather  than  the  statements  of  Scripture 
touching  the  latter,  we  are  justified  in  using  a  definition  better  suited 
to  the  point  of  view  under  consideration.  And  to  this  none;  is  more 
satisfactory  than  that  employed  by  Martensen,  viz.,  "  Sin  is  a  false 
relation  of  existence."  As  such  it  is  neither  exclusively  a  creature 
nor  an  accident,  but  a  perversion  of  the  creature-will  along  the  line 
of  a  false  independence,  a  hfe  away  from  God,  which  is  itself  death. 
All  things  were  made  for  God.  He  is  the  end  no  less  than  the 
cause  or  author  of  creation.  Men  and  angels  were  made  for  his 
glory.  Not  only  was  their  happiness,  and  their  communion  to  be 
sought  and  found  in  him,  but  any  supreme  aim  of  life  than  him,  any 
conception  of  existence  that  did  not  recognize  his  will  as  the  highest 
law  and  good,  or  any  employment  of  those  divinely  given  powers 
with  which  he  was  endowed  that  did  not  practically  and  obediently 


746  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

acknowledge  his  claims  as  primary  to  all  others,  yea  as  the  very  end 
of  rational  being,  was  self-prostitution  of  the  most  real  and  thorough 
character,  and  could  only  precipitate  the  complete  derangement  of 
all  the  powers  and  faculties  of  his  nature.  Man  as  an  organism  was 
replete  with  God,  or  rather  God  was  himself  the  fundamental  law  of 
his  being.  The  very  basis  of  the  human  nature  was  laid  in  the 
divine  grace,  and  this  conditioned  and  determined  the  entire  or- 
ganism. For  man  there  can  be  no  legitimate  end  out  of  and  be- 
yond God.  And  to  determine  life  by  any  other  principle  than  this 
is  to  sin  no  less  against  himself  than  against  God.  Verily,  sin  is  a 
perversion  of  human  nature,  and  as  such  a  false  relation  of  existence. 

What  is  will  ?  Considered  as  a  faculty  the  will  is  in  its  very 
nature  self-determining.  In  the  exercise  of  this  the  subject  chooses 
between  various  alternatives,  determines  himself  to  ends.  Formal 
definitions  have  been  very  conflicting,  but  viewing  these  closely 
there  is  an  approximate  agreement  touching  the  most  vital  function 
of  this  faculty,  viz.,  that  of  self-determination.  The  various  defini- 
tions given  and  cited  by  Dr.  Baugher  *  when  narrowly  examined, 
confirm  this  view.  Almost  without  exception  there  is  either  ex- 
pressed or  implied  this  essential  characteristic,  that  the  will  is  the 
power  to  choose  or  to  determine  for  one's  self  That  its  essence  is 
freedom  is  involved  in  the  very  idea  of  the  term.  Constraint  in  the 
direction  either  of  virtue  or  of  vice  is  a  contradiction.  Not  that  the 
will  in  its  present  state  may  of  itself  choose  the  good  and  refuse  the 
evil,  but  that  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  is  contrary  to  the  will  as 
now  affected  by  sin  or  grace.  It  was  to  the  Israelites  in  their  strong 
and  stubborn  tendency  to  apostasy  that  Joshua  said,  "  Choose  ye 
this  day  whom  ye  will  serve."  It  must  not  be  confounded  with  the 
intellect  or  the  sensibilities,  though  these  are  the  faculties  which 
present  conditions  and  occasions  of  will-action.  It  was  in  failing  to 
make  and  preserve  this  distinction  that  Edwards  and'  others  were 
led  to  advocate  the  doctrine  of  necessity. 

It  is  not  maintained  that  the  will  is  wholly  independent.  This 
could  not  be  inasmuch  as  it  is  of  God.  Neither  is  it  affirmed  that 
tYiQ  forms  of  its  activity  are  entirely  within  its  own  power;  or  that  it 
chooses  without  motives,  or  independent  of  and  apart  from  the  sensi- 
bilities and  the  intellect.     But  that  over  and  above  all,  and  notwith- 

*See  p.  699. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  747 

standing  all,  it  possesses  the  divinely  given  power  or  prerogative  to 
determine  itself.  In  this  also  were  we  made  in  the  image  of  God. 
He  hfts  will,  infinite  and  absolute,  unchangeable  in  nature  and 
essence,  and  to  whom  sin  can  be  neither  actual  nor  possible.  Man, 
who  is  a  microtheism,  as  well  as  a  microcosm,  is  in  nothing  more 
God-like  than  in  the  possession  of  this  attribute.  Answering  alike 
to  his  being  and  to  his  destiny  is  the  power  to  elect  and  freely  for 
himself  in  harmony  with  his  God-given  nature.  The  most  essential 
notion  of  this  is,  not  that  at  any  moment  he  can  do  as  he  pleases,  as 
though  this  prerogative  were  given  him  to  flaunt  as  a  defiant  power 
in  the  face  of  the  Almighty.  It  is  insisted  upon  that  human  free- 
dom, as  to  its  idea,  does  not  consist  in  "power  to  the  contrary"  at 
any  moment  or  in  any  action.  On  the  contraray,  its  primary  dis- 
tinction is  in  choosing/(?r  God, /or  right,  and/or  holiness.  This  is 
to  determine  ourselves  according  to  the  condition  of  our  being  as 
God  made  it  in  the  beginning.  Decision  in  the  direction  of  the 
opposite  is  as  truly  violation  of  that  nature  as  it  is  of  divine  law.  I 
have  the  power  to  do  my  neighbor  personal  injury,  to  protect  his 
life  and  character;  or  by  malicious  act  or  neglect  contribute  to  the 
destruction  of  both.  I  can  do  either.  But  if  I  will  his  injury  is  that 
involved  and  necessarily  in  the  idea  of  freedom?  Is  not  this  clearly 
its  abuse  or  perversion  ?  Is  not  the  right  alone  consistent  with  the 
true  conception  of  created  liberty?  Unquestionably  so.  Its  truth  is 
involved  in  this,  that  we  were  made  for  God,  and  in  his,  image.  To 
that  his  end  as  our  end,  his  service  and  glory  as  our  delight,  and  his 
expressed  will  as  our  vocation,  is  not  only  the  true  exercise  of  lib- 
erty, but  the  only  line  of  conduct  that  can  consist  with  our  destiny. 
He  may  and  can  turn  away  from  the  normal  line  of  behavior  on 
which  he  was  placed  at  his  creation,  may  come  to  an  adverse  decis- 
ion, and  elect  as  an  aim  of  life  what  is  opposed  to  the  divine  will — 
all  which  is  involved  as  :^  possibility  in  the  possession  of  freedom — 
but  this  is  the  abuse  of  what  he  has  and  is;  and  this  is  sin.  "The 
essence  of  will,  according  to  any  adequate  conception  of  it,  is,  that  it 
cannot  be  perverted,  it  can  only  pervert  itself"  * 

Standing  in  the  light  of  these  views,  views  that  are  based,  we 
believe,  no  less  upon  a  true  anthropology  than  upon  theology,  we 
have  and  hold  the  truth  of  the  question  at  issue.     Objections  by  way 

*  Miiller. 


74^  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  inference  may  be  drawn  and  urged  against  it.  But  the  ground, 
metaphysical  and  moral,  is  solid,  established  upon  the  divine  word 
and  being,  as  well  as  upon  the  nature  of  man.  Upon  this  we  will 
stand,  let  a  carping  criticism  or  an  anti-Christian  philosophy  object 
as  they  may.  Sin  has  been  caused  by  the  will  of  the  rational  crea- 
ture "  in  turning  away  from  God,  which  act,  God  not  aiding," 

"  Brought  death  into  our  world  and  all  its  woe." 

With  what  beauty  and  pathos  has  the  poet  expressed  this  same 
truth  : 

"Thou  art  the  source  and  centre  of  all  minds, 
Their  only  point  of  rest,  eternal  Word  ! 
From  thee  departing,  they  are  lost  and  rove 
At  random,  without  honor,  hope,  or  peace. 
From  thee  is  all  that  soothes  the  life  of  man — 
His  high  endeavor  and  his  glad  success, 
His  strength  to  suffer  and  his  will  to  serve." 

Have  we  not  here  too  an  answer  to  the  earnest  questionings  of 
Dante  ? 

"  One  doubt  remains, 

That  wrings  me  sorely,  if  I  solve  it  not. 

******        ^ 

The  world  indeed,  is  even  so  forlorn 
Of  all  good,  as  thou  speakest  it,  and  so  swarms 
With  every  evil,  yet,  beseech  thee,  point 
The  cause  out  to  me,  that  myself  may  see 
And  unto  others  show  it:  for  in  heaven 
One  places  it,  and  one  on  earth  below.  ' 

That  was  an  age  in  which  the  Pelagianism  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
had  wrought  out  the  deepest  immorality  among  priests  and  people. 
The  doctrine  of  necessity,  even  to  the  extreme  of  fatalism,  was  a 
natural  reaction.  The  prevalent  religion  and  philosophy  contributed 
alike  to  unsettle  the  foundations  of  society.  Hope  in  God  and  man 
was  well  nigh  quenched. 

Sin  entered  the  universe  of  God  before  it  entered  our  world. 
There  was  a  fall  among  the  angels,  led  by  a  chief  angel,  who,  when 
man  was  created,  seduced  him  from  his  holy  estate.  What  that  sin 
of  the  apostate  angels  was  we  are  not  definitely  informed  in  Holy 
Scripture.  But  that  it  consisted  just  in  this  turning  axvay  from  God, 
from  the  contemplation  of  him  and  his  service,  viewed  as  the  high- 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  749 

est  good,  to  that  of  self;  that  pride,  born  of  ambition,  was  its  nature 
and  cause,  is  the  thought  ruling  in  that  fine  epic  of  Milton,  and 
based,  we  think,  no  less  upon  a  just  inference  from  the  Scriptures. 
The  outward  revolt  had  its  cause  in,  and  was  consequent  upon,  an 
inner  turning  away  from  God.  The  issue  of  that  act  was  a  state 
characterized  by  complete  perversion,  or  rather  inversion  of  nature, 
followed  thence-forward  by  an  existence  in  thorough,  earnest,  and 
all-embracing  opposition  and  hatred  of  God.  That  this  is  true  is 
confirmed  by  the  "  history  of  the  devil  "  from  the  beginning.  There 
was  a  time  when  sin  had  no  existence,  a  time  this  side  the  first 
divine  creative  act.  God  not  only  lived  the  "  highest  in  the  highest, 
the  holy  in  the  holy;  dwelling  in  that  ineffable  blessedness  which 
from  all  eternity  belonged  to  his  infinite  being  and  perfections,  but 
holy  angels  also,  his  creatures,  lived  and  served  in  adoring  contem- 
plation of  his  matchless  character,  and  in  loving,  reverent  obedience 
to  his  will.  The  physical  universe  with  its  head  and  lord  was  not 
yet  called  into  existence.  It  had  its  being  only  in  the  divine  mind, 
was  the  subject  of  the  divine  councils  of  the  blessed  Trinity,  and 
played  before  the  vision  of  that  all-seeing  Intelligence  as  an  object 
worthy  his  infinite  contemplation  and  activity  ere  '  the  morning  stars 
sang  together,  and  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy'"  at  its  actual 
creation.  That  ideal  world  which  God  was  occupied  and  delighted 
with  beholding,  and  which  was  even  then  his  world,  was  replete  with 
the  holy  harmonies  of  his  being.  That  it  might  be  entered  and 
ruined  by  sin  was  a  possibility  which  was  present  to  his  mind  from 
the  beginning,  but  to  create  a  world  to  which  sin  was  actual  and 
necessary  did  not  come  within  the  divine  purpose.  A  world  with- 
out sin,  and  free  from  all  moral  disorder,  was  alone  worthy  of  his 
eternal  beholding  and  admiration.  When  he  executed  that  infinite 
purpose  in  giving  to  the  world  actual  being  "the  man  "  was  created, 
and  constituted  its  crowning  glory.  The  beautiful  image  of  his 
maker,  the  living  union  of  nature  and  spirit,  created  in  holiness  and 
truth,  yet  capable  of  and  destined  for  an  endless  development,  living 
in  real  communion  with  God,  and  yet  in  real  union  with  the  world 
whose  head  and  lord  he  was  made,  he  went  forth  to  work  out  under 
God  his  high  destiny.  Constituted  by  nature  and  grace  with  every 
endowment  requisite  to  his  work,  with  the  earth  as  the  sphere  of 
his  activity,  there  lay  out  before  him  a  mission  which  he  was  in  every 
way  qualified  to   fulfill.     To  grow  in   righteousness  and  truth,  to 


750  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

behaiie  himself  before  God  in  holy  obedience  to  his  will  in  all  things, 
and  thus  "  to  go  on  to  perfection,"  was  to  him  the  only  normal 
course  of  life.  Satan  entered  that  garden,  tempted,  seduced  this 
holy  pair.  The  fall  followed;  sin  was  conceived,  and  brought  forth 
then,  and  ever  after,  its  terrible  brood  of  death.  What  was  this  sin 
but  an  inward  turning  away  from  God,  desire  after  what  was  pro- 
hibited? and  this  cherished  led  to  outward  disobedience. 

This  first  sin,  original  in  a  unique  sense,  may  claim  a  close  con- 
sideration. Accepting  the  literal  sense  of  the  Mosaic  narrative,  it  is 
maintained  that  the  fruit  should  have  appeared  pleasant  to  the  eyes, 
an  object  to  be  desired,  was  not  in  itself  sin.  That  the  world — 
beauty  as  created  of  God  and  existing  under  whatever  form — should 
excite  a  response  in  the  human  nature,  was  inherent  in  the  divinely 
constituted  order  of  things  and  morally  indifferent.  Did  not  this 
result  follow  necessarily  from  the  nature-basis  of  the  human  crea- 
ture? Made  for  the  world,  and  the  converse,  it  is  affirmed  that  it 
could  not  be  otherwise.  Man,  being  relatively  a  mediator  between 
God  and  the  world,  is  participant  in  the  nature  of  both,  and  is  moved 
by  the  life  from  beneath,  as  ^^'ell  as  by  that  fi-om  above.  The  free 
personal  union  of  the  two,  they  meet  in  him,  finding  here  their  con- 
stant, conscious,  living  communion.  God  is  supreme,  and  to  him 
all  life  and  action,  and  all  the  manifold  relations  that  enter  into  and 
constitute  the  existence  of  the  conscious  creature,  must  be  held  in 
subordination.  Man  possesses  faculties  which  are  adapted  to  find 
their  chief  exercise  in  cherishing  and  recognizing  this  union  in  sub- 
ordination to  that  divine  will,  and  thus  in  leading  up  and  on  to  higher 
and  perfected  realities.  That  his  senses,  external  and  internal,  should 
receive  impressions  from  the  world  ad  extra  and  ad  intra,  should 
respond  to  the  beauty  and  harmony  which  God  has  with  generous 
hand  inwrought  in  all  creation,  and  move  with  the  interest  of  a  gen- 
uine sympathy  towards  its  kindred  nature,  inheres  in  the  very  union 
insisted  upon.  But  to  contemplate  this  beauty  as  something  to  be 
desired  apart  from  God,  to  look  upon  it  as  a  good  in  itself,  as  some- 
thing to  be  possessed  in  violation  of  his  will  expressed  or  implied, 
was  the  danger,  yea,  was  sin  itself  That  God  had  said,  "  thou  shalt 
not  eat  of  it"  was  enough.  That  divine  interdict  was  itself  the  high- 
est expression  of  law,  the  supreme  reason  for  abstinence.  That  this 
command  was  purely  arbitrary  we  need  not  conclude ;  nor  claim 
that  he  should  state  the  explicit  reason  for  imposing  the  prohibition. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  75 1 

This  would  not  be  in  keeping  with  himself  as  absolute  sovereign, 
nor  with  the  subject  as  rational  creature.  Created  and  placed  in  a 
state  of  probation,  possessing  will  in  liberty,  he  must  elect  for  him- 
self, and  choose  as  his  own  what  God  had  given  and  put  before  him. 
Occupying  with  respect  to  the  good  within  and  without  a  relation 
analogous  to  that  of  man  in  regeneration,  he  is  called  in  free  en- 
deavor to  appropriate  as  personal  possession  what  was  his  own  as  a 
gift.  Virtue,  as  character,  cannot  be  given;  it  must  be  acquired  by 
and  through  personal  endeavor.  This  involves  and  demands  posi- 
tion in  which  free,  conscious  choice  can  be  made.  Adam  was 
created  with  a  nature  which  was  throughout  in  harmony  with  God, 
and  loving  the  good,  but  with  the  power  of  deciding,  under  tempta- 
tion, to  the  contrary.  This  latter  was  abuse  of  power  and  sin.  But 
to  contemplate,  earnestly  and  in  continuance  to  look  upon  that  con- 
cerning which  God  had  said,  "  thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it,"  was  certainly 
to  cherish  and  fondly  that  which  was  prohibited.  And  thus  cher- 
ishing the  thought  of  that  object,  the  desire  to  possess  it  resulted  in 
the  inner  choice,  the  will-movement  towards  it,  and  this  again  in 
that  act  which  was  contrary  to  God's  command. 

This  may  be  not  so  much  an  explanation  as  the  statement  of  what 
we  hold  to  be  the  facts  in  the  instance  of  that  first  sin.  The  whole 
subject,  when  traced  to  its  elements,  is  an  acknowledged  mystery 
But  it  is  still  true  that  the  will  viewed  in  its  nature  possesses  the 
fearful  prerogative  of  choosing  otherwise  than  as  God  had  ordered, 
adverse  to  the  end  for  which  it  was  created,  and  which  at  the  same 
time  was  out  of  harmony  with  itself  That  contrary  act  was  sin, 
and  the  guilt  of  this  was  that  of  the  will  so  deciding.  This  sin  was 
approached  before  that  act  of  the  will  passed.  Holding  that  desire 
before  the  mind,  cherishing  it,  was  the  sure  way  to  danger.  Stand- 
ing in  the  presence  of  that  which  God  had  strictly  forbidden  them 
to  take  should  have  rendered  them  watchful.  Disobedience  was  not 
in  .seeing  the  fruit  of  that  tree,  but  in  eating  it.  The  attitude  was 
perilous,  the  place  itself  was  one  of  danger  to  these  untried  crea- 
tures. Then  the  tempter  appears  upon  the  scene,  and  by  his  lies 
seduced  them.  They  ate  of  the  fruit  and  fell.  But  this  result  was 
not  a  necesssary  one.  They  could  have  overcome  in  this  trial,  might 
have  withdrawn  from  that  scene  morally  pure  and  stronger  than  be- 
fore, and  thereby  driven  Satan  from  Paradise  as  he  had  been  driven 
from  heaven,  and  established  tiicmselves  in  their  holy  possessions. 


752  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

All  this  inhered  in  that  will-power  which  God  gave  them.  An  anal- 
ogy to  this  is  furnished  in  the  life  of  the  second  Adam.  Suffering  in 
the  wilderness  and  in  the  garden  was  not  in  itself  pleasant  to  him- 
Even  the  accomplishment  of  his  mission  by  the  infinite  sacrifice  it  de- 
manded was  not  preferred  for  the  suffering's  sake.  It  was  his  desire 
and  prayer  to  the  Father  that  it  might  be  otherwise.  Have  we  not 
that  prayer  thrice  repeated? — "O  my  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let 
this  cup  pass  from  me !  "  But  to  escape  this  suffering  never  reached 
an  act  of  the  will.  Even  the  desire  to  accomplish  his  work  without 
that  unutterably  bitter  experience  was  wholly  conditioned  upon  the 
will  of  his  Father.  That  a  desire  may,  if  cherished,  lead  to  sin,  and 
yet  not  be  itself  sinful,  is  traced  to  the  passive  relation  of  the  sensi- 
bilities to  the  world  around  us.  It  has  its  ground  in  that  peculiarity 
of  the  hum.an  creature  by  which  he  is  allied  to  nature.  An  angel 
cannot  feel  as  does  man,  because  he  has  no  side  nature- ward.  The 
essence  of  the  temptation  consisted  in  that  the  world  presented  real 
attractions,  that  it  excited  emotions  and  desires,  which,  indulged  in 
themselves,  might  and  would  lead  away  from  God.  Holding  on 
to  these  was  the  way  to  death,  and  did  issue  in  willing  violation  of 
the  divine  law.  Not  until  the  will  became  wicked  in  man  or  devils 
was  sin  fully  born.  The  thought  of  evil  was  not  sin,  any  more  than 
is  the  thought  of  virtue,  virtue.  It  is  only  the  evil  thoiigJit  brought 
to  the  birth  in  actual,  personal  experience,  that  is  sin.  Adam,  apart 
from  trial,  would  have  never  attained  that  perfection  to  which  he 
was  destined.  Even  the  sinless  Captain  of  our  salvation  was  "  made 
perfect  through  suffering,"  and  all  those  who  follow  him  into  glory 
go  up  "through  much  tribulation."  Desire  as  an  affection  of  the 
soul  in  the  unfallen  creature  is  either  good,  or,  viewed  as  excited  by 
a  tempting  object,  adapted  to  bring  to  a  moral  decision.  The  pro- 
hibited tree  presented  itself 'as  good  for  food,  and  as  pleasant  to  the 
eyes,  and  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise.'  Without  the  tempter 
the  fall  could  not  have  occurred,  neither  without  an  object  that 
appealed  to  the  sensible  nature.  Both  were  suited  to  lead  to  that 
personal  decision,  the  conscious  act  of  the  will,  which  God  could  not, 
because  he  would  not  prevent.  The  tree  was  placed  *'  in  the  midst 
of  the  garden."  God  could  have  warned  them  against  approaching 
it,  and  the  woman  in  a  spirit  of  obedience  to  that  injunction  might 
have  avoided  the  possibility  of  seeing  its  alluring  fruit.  But  that 
would  have  defeated  one  purpose  at  least  in  placing  it  there,  that  of 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  753 

trial.  The  Almighty  does  not  design  that  they  shall  be  kept  out  of 
danger.  He  would  keep  them  in  temptation  as  he  keeps  his  people 
now  while  they  are  in  the  way  of  duty,  pledging  the  presence  oi  that 
sufficient  grace  in  which  they  may  conquer.  The  danger  was  not 
in  the  tree  so  much  as  in  the  created  liberty,  united  with  that  natural 
susceptibility  to  impressions  from  without  and  within.  In  the  exer- 
cise of  this  liberty,  the  highest,  noblest,  and  most  god-like  endow- 
ment he  possessed,  man  might  turn  away  from  God,  might  pervert 
that  which  was  given  for  good  ends  to  his  own  destruction,  and 
thereby  meet  what  was  intended  for  probation  into  an  occasion  for 
the  fall.  What  was  possible  became  actual,  and  the  history  of  man 
has  been  from  the  beginning  a  history  of  misdevelopment.  Kvil  is 
not  a  creation,  although  it  has  become  living  in  creation.  It  is  only 
conceivable  as  a  perverted  selfish  quality  of  the  will  of  the  personal 
creature,  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  formal  freedom  of  this  creature. 
Evil  as  such  has  no  existence  [nitllam  habet  substaniiain),  but  we 
give  the  name  of  evil  to  the  quality  of  that  creature-will  which,  in 
opposition  to  God's  will,  and  to  man's  own  nature,  refuses  to  stand 
in  a  receptive  relation  to  God,  and  will  be  its  own  independent  lord, 
its  own  God."*  But,  it  is  again  affirmed,  this  was  in  no  sense  a 
necessity.  Because  sin  is  a  voluntary  act,  an  act  of  the  will,  con- 
trary to  the  divine  will  in  form  and  fact,  as  written  in  the  word  of 
God,  as  well  as  in  the  conscience  of  man,  it  is  that  which  oiiglit  not 
to  be,  and  therefore  involves  guilt. 

The  application  of  the  principle,  upon  which  we  have  been  insist- 
ing, to  all  forms  and  degrees  of  sin  is  evident  upon  reflection.  Sin 
in  its  nature  is  the  same,  no  matter  what  may  be  the  state  or  circum- 
stances of  the  subject.  The  will  in  its  relation  to  sin  has  suffered  a 
most  material  change  since  the  fall,  but  the  cause  of  sin,  now  as  then, 
is  the  "will  of  the  wicked."  That  it  is  less  heinous  in  the  sight  of 
God  when  committed  by  a  fallen  creature  we  dare  not  conclude;  or 
that  he  regards  with  less  disfavor  that  depraved  condition  of  will 
which  has  followed  upon  the  first  turning  away  from  him.  That 
first  act  of  transgression,  resulting  in  the  perverse  use  of  freedom, 
induced  a  state  of  will  in  Adam,  which  has  been  traduced  to  all  born 
of  him.  The  union  between  the  human  and  the  divine  will  has  been 
destroyed,  and  discord  and  enmity  have  followed  upon  the  com- 

*  Ebrard  in  Olshausen's  Commentary  on  Hebrews. 


754  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

munion  and  harmony  that  once  reigned.  Instead  of  that  "true  fear 
of  God,  and  true  love  to  God"  which  characterized  the  first  man, 
heart,  and  understanding,  and  will,  all  attuned  in  loving  sympathy 
with  his  being  and  perfections,  he  has  become  throughout  depraved. 
Self  is  now  the  centre  of  human  activity.  Sin  has  dethroned  God 
from  his  supreme  place  in  the  heart,  and  with  this  the  understand- 
ing has  become  darkened  respecting  a  true  knowledge  of  his  being, 
the  will  has  been  perverted,  turned  from  him,  no  less  than  from  its 
normal  self,  and  a  misdirected  life,  alienated  in  all  its  energies  and 
functions  characterizes  him  from  birth  to  death.  And  just  as  before 
the  fall  the  will  in  its  state  of  holiness  conditioned  and  determined 
his  activities,  so  now  the  same  will  in  its  depraved  state  must  con- 
dition all  life  and  conduct.  In  both  this  state  of  will  lies  back  of  all 
the  acts  and  exercises  of  the  conscious  and  unconscious  life  of  the 
moral  creature.  Deeper  than  the  desires  of  the  heart,  underneath 
the  motives  that  determine  the  will,  and  lying  back  of  the  loving  and 
the  hating,  the  hoping  and  the  fearing,  that  so  largely  make  up 
human  life,  is  this  state,  the  all-conditioning  factor  of  the  moral  char- 
acter of  man.  This  very  basis  of  human  nature  has  become  totally 
depraved,  total  in  each  and  total  in  all.  The  power  of  choice  be- 
tween good  and  evil  distinguished  man  in  his  uprightness.  Not 
that  he  occupied  the  point  of  indifference  between  the  two,  but 
that,  holy  in  nature,  he  was  called  to  the  conscious  decision  of  his 
own  destiny,  and  in  the  abuse  of  created  liberty  might  determine  for 
himself  an  end  contrary  to  God  and  holiness.  He  chose  the  latter, 
and  in  this  act  precipitated  himself  and  his  posterity  into  a  condi- 
tion of  moral  alienation  from  his  Creator.  There  is  therefore  no 
longer  the  power  of  choice  between  the  good  and  the  evil.  The 
will  is  in  a  state  of  abject  slavery  as  regards  the  choice  of  good, 
apart  from  redeeming  grace  in  hopeless  bondage,  and  left  to  itself 
cannot  but  sin.  This  condition  has  become  the  heritage  of  the  race. 
Heathen  writers  have  left  some  striking  testimonies  in  confirma- 
tion of  the  truth  of  this  fact.  Pythagoras  describes  it  in  this  lan- 
guage :  "  The  fatal  companion,  the  noxious  strife  that  lurks  within 
us,  and  which  was  born  along  with  us;"  Aristotle:  "The  natural  re- 
pugnance of  man's  temper  to  reason."  Cicero  lamented,  "That  men 
are  brought  into  life  by  nature  as  a  stepmother,  with  a  naked,  frail 
and  infirm  body,  and  with  a  soul  prone  to  divers  lusts;"  Seneca, 
"  That  the  seeds  of  all  the  vices  are  in  all  men,  though  they  do  not 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  755 

break  out  in  every  one."  Hierocles  called  this  universal  moral  taint, 
"The  domestic  evil  of  mankind."  Horace  declared  that  "Mankind 
rush  into  wickpdness,  and  always  desire  what  is  forbidden;  that 
youth  has  the  softness  of  wax  to  receive  vicious  impressions,  and 
the  hardness  of  rock  to  resist  virtuous  admonitions."  And  Juvenal 
has  furnished  a  striking  corroboration  to  the  statement  of  Paul  of 
Tarsus  concerning  the  carnal  mind  (Rom.  vii.  18-23),  when  he  says 
that  "  Nature,  unchangeably  fixed,  runs  back  to  wickedness,  as  bodies 
to  their  centre." 

It  is  true  as  the  Confession  of  the  Lutheran  Church  states  that 
"The  human  reason  or  the  natural  intellect  of  man  has  some  dim 
spark  of  the  knowledge  that  God  is,  and  holds  some  little  part  of 
the  law."  This,  however,  does  not  constitute  an  active  capacity  for 
good.  Rather  because  he  possesses  this  in  his  depraved  condition 
is  he  capable  of  redemption,  and  may  be  reached  by  the  grace  of 
the  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God.  Between  man  in  his  corrupt  state 
and  that  grace  that  bringeth  salvation  the  very  point  of  union  is  this 
susceptibility.  Without  it  we  do  not  understand  how  his  redemp- 
tion would  be  possible.  To  this  the  appeals  of  the  law  and  the  gos- 
pel are  made,  and  they  find  a  response  in  every  human  heart.  But 
that  fact  does  not  impair  the  truth  of  the  declarations  of  scripture, 
or  the  testimony  of  conscience,  concerning  our  total  corruption  by 
nature.  Neither  does  it  invalidate  the  statement  of  the  Article  under 
consideration,  that  the  "  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  wicked,"  sin 
no  less  in  those  to  whom  depravity  has  become  an  inheritance  than 
in  him  to  whom  it  was  original.  Once  the  product  of  an  act,  or 
rather  of  act  and  state  consisting  together,  sin  has  become,  in  its 
primary  conception,  a  state  of  the  will,  all  whose  activities,  external 
and  internal,  are  opposed  to  the  divine  will.  And  it  is  just  as  true, 
that,  while  the  necessity  of  sinning  is  upon  man  in  this  depraved 
condition,  it  is  not  forced  upon  him  by  any  external  power.  The 
will  still  chooses  as  its  own  this  apostate  condition,  stands  by  nature 
in  an  attitude  of  decision  as  regards  sin,  loving  and  doing  it  even 
before  consciousness  has  advanced  to  maturity.  This  state  is  itself 
one  of  sin.  That  is  the  most  thorough-going  superficiality  which 
denies  that  to  be  sin  which  lies  back  of  consciousness.  As  well 
maintain  that  the  child  has  neither  conscience  nor  reason  before 
these  powers  are  consciously  exercised.  Nor  is  it  less  superficial  to 
hold,  that,  since  we  are  born  in  a  state  of  sin  that  necessarily  condi- 


756  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tions  all  the  subsequent  natural  life,  this  state  of  nature  cannot  in- 
volve responsibility  and  guilt.  Sin  has  become  a  fatality,  but  it  is 
none  the  less  guilt  before  God  and  conscience.  In,  the  mystery  of 
the  will  we  discover  the  cause  of  sin  in  an  innocent  and  holy  being. 
In  the  mystery  of  the  same  will,  depraved  though  it  be,  and  inher- 
ited as  a  state  of  perverseness  from  our  parents,  we  find  guilt.  Des- 
tiny, now  as  then,  is  a  matter  of  choice.  As  life  advances  towards 
its  maturity  the  sense  of  sin  and  guilt  anticipates  the  first  opening  of 
consciousness.  It  is  there,  because  it  is  born  with  each  incoming 
life.  With  inexorable  fidelity  it  stands  over  every  one.  He  can  no 
more  evade  it  than  can  he  escape  from  himself  It  holds  him  under 
its  relentless  eye  because  it  is  his  possession  by  nature.  It  was  the 
recognition  of  this  fact  that  prompted  that  language  of  the  apostle 
— hovv  like  an  exclamation  of  despair  it  sounds! — "O  wretched  man 
that  I  am!  who  shall  deliver  me  from  this  body  of  death?"  In 
this  the  will  is  involved  in  bondage  to  the  remorseless  tyrant.  In 
such  voluntary  and  complete  subjection  to  sin,  how  can  it  choose 
the  love  and  service  of  a  God  of  infinite  holiness  and  truth? 

In  this  connection  the  statement  of  this  fact  is  demanded,  that,  in 
the  centre  of  humanity,  the  bondage  of  sin  has  been  broken.  The 
Gospel  is  the  good  news  of  deliverance  from  its  power.  Jesus  Christ, 
God's  eternal  Son,  assumed  enslaved  human  nature,  vanquished  the 
power  of  sin,  and  secured  for  all  men  new  life  in  peace  with  God. 
He  was  the  vicar  of  God,  as  of  man,  and  his  work  brought  in  a  sure 
and  perfect  salvation  for  all.  This  fact  itself,  the  Gospel  offered  in 
its  saving  power  to  all  who  believe.  Wherever  this  is  preached,  or 
in  any  way  proclaimed,  life  and  deliverance  are  promised.  Nor 
is  it  a  bare  word  of  declaration  concerning  what  has  been  done  by 
Christ.  The  power  to  accept  is  in  the  offered  salvation.  Accept- 
ance is  salvation.  That  such  has  been  secured  in  itself  helps  no  one. 
This  fact,  as  a  mere  fact,  might  be  posted  all  over  heathendom,  and 
yet  no  one  be  lifted  from  his  bondage.  There  must  be  proclamation 
made  in  order  that  man  may  "stand  upon  his  feet,"  then  hear  and 
believe.  That  word  made  known  breaks  up  the  absoluteness  of  the 
state  of  nature,  and  in  good  faith  offers  to  him  the  power  to  accept  it 
by  a  trustful  act  of  the  heart.  If  he  refuses,  then  verily,  his  blood  is 
upon  his  own  head.  "  This  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come 
into  the  world."  The  act  of  rejection  is  ours,  that  of  believing  ac- 
ceptance is  the  gift  of  God. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  757 

The  conclusion  reached  by  this  h'ne  of  thought,  which  is  indeed 
Httle  more  tlian  an  elaboration  of  what  the  Scriptures  plainly  treat 
and  imply,  is  clearly  confirmed  in  the  testimony  of  conscience.  The 
sense  of  guilt  which  possesses  every  one  is  an  unanswerable  argu- 
ment against  the  theories  that  would  find  the  cause  of  sin  in  any 
other  source  than  that  given  in  our  Article.  Trace  it  to  any  other 
origin,  and  you  have  absolutely  no  explanation  of  the  fact  mentioned. 
There  is  a  form  of  determinism,  nearly  allied  to  the  theory  of  neces- 
sity, which  affirms  that,  while  man  is  not  forced  by  any  external 
power  to  any  act  or  line  of  conduct,  he  is  yet  so  absolutely  under 
the  control  of  motives  that  freedom  is  entirely  a  delusion.  But 
whether  this  be  maintained  under  the  form  of  a  dogmatic,  a  philo- 
sophical or  fatalistic  determinism,  conscience  testifies  alike  against 
every  phase  of  the  theory.  Its  imperatives  stand  over  against  all 
necessitarianism,  and  it  will  admit  the  truth  of  no  explanation  that 
contradicts  its  own  experience.  My  sin  is  guilt,  and  is  that  which 
ought  not  to  be.  This  testimony  of  conscience  has  been  much  em- 
phasized in  explanation  of  other  facts,  and  has  been  often  called 
upon  to  give  evidence  concerning  that  which  it  could  not  know. 
But  there  is  no  question  upon  which  it  can  more  rightly  testif\%  or 
concerning  which  it  has  better  knowledge  of  the  facts  in  the  case, 
than  the  one  under  dispute.  Conscience  always  and  everywhere 
agrees  in  its  witness  as  to  the  fict  of  personal  sin  and  guilt.  Even 
among  the  heathen  who  are  ignorant  of  the  revelation  of  God  in 
word,  and  who  know  nothing  of  the  salvation  in  Christ,  this  sense  of 
guilt  is  found.  Though  clouded,  yea  grossly  darkened  by  sin,  yet 
"  feeling  after  God,  if  haply  they  may  find  him,"  they  are  ready  to 
acknowledge  this  as  a  fact  of  conscience.  This  would  not  be  ex- 
plicable, indeed  could  not  be,  if  sin  were  a  necessity,  or  had  its 
origin  elsewhere  than  in  the  will.  This  alone  explains  the  mystery 
of  sin,  with  its  attendant  condemnation.  To  some  degree  there  is  in 
all  that  special  work  of  the  law,  ''  the  knowledge  of  sin."  Death  owes 
its  sting  to  this,  and  it  is  that  which  creates  the  fear  and  bondage 
of  death,  the  common  heritage  of  all  who  know  not  him  who 
through  death  has  abolished  its  power.  Wc  repeat,  against  all  the- 
ories that  would  refer  sin  to  any  other  cause  than  that  here  stated 
stands  the  inviolate  and  inviolable  testimony  of  conscience.  How 
strikingly  is  its  power  described  by  Juvenal : 

49 


758  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Cur  tamen  hos  tu 
Evasisse  putes,  quos  diri  conscia  facti 
Mens  habet  attonitos  et  surdo  verbore  caedit. 
Occultum  quatiente  animo  tortore  flagellum  ? 
Poena  autem  vehemens  ac  multo  saevior  illis, 
Quas  et  Caedicius  gravis  invenit  et  Rhadamanthus, 
Node  diequc  simm  ge  stare  in  pec  tore  testem. 
****** 

Has  patitur  poenas  peccandi  sola  voluntas. 
Nam  scelus  intra  se  taciturn  qui  cogitat  uUum, 
Facti  crimen  habet :  Cedo,  si  conata  peregit  ?  * 

This  disquisition  may  not  close  without  some  inquiry  concerning 
the  theodicy.  The  question  is,  how  can  we  reconcile  the  existence 
of  sin  with  the  character  of  God?  If  this  problem  has  received  no 
special  consideration  in  the  discussion  already  had,  it  is  certainly 
not  because  it  has  not  pressed  itself  upon  our  attention.  To  leave 
it  unnoticed  would  be  to  pass  over  one  of  the  most  prominent,  per- 
haps the  most  prominent  fact  obtruding  itself  upon  the  history  of 
earnest  critical  thought.  It  has  claimed  and  received  the  recogni- 
tion of  philosophers  and  theologians  in  every  age.  Around  it  have 
been  constructed  varying  systems,  between  which  the  sharpest  con- 
flicts have  been  waged.  Not  infrequently  conclusions  have  been 
reached  dishonoring  alike  to  God  and  man.  Some  of  the  profound- 
est  and  acutest  thinkers  of  our  race  have  acknowledged  their  ina- 
bility to  find,  after  patient  and  long-continued  investigations,  a  satis- 
factory solution  of  the  embarrassing  question,  and  have  retired  into 
avowed  skepticism,  or  abandoning  belief  in  the  power  and  goodness 
of  God,  have  regarded  him  as  maintaining  an  attitude  of  indifference 
towards  the  world  he  has  created.  Socrates  and  Plato  confessed 
themselves  unable  to  answer  the  question.  Descartes,  Spinoza,  and 
Hobbes,  although  representing  various  systems  of  philosophy,  based 
upon  anti-scriptural  premises  and  reasonings  their  conclusions,  and 
bound  the  human  will  in  an  iron  necessity  that  destroyed  all  moral 
responsibility.  Is  not  the  same  true  of  Malebranche,  Lessing, 
Goethe,  and  many  others,  who,  misconceiving  the  greatness  of  God, 
could  find  no  room  for  the  exercise  of  created  liberty  within  the  di- 
vine government?  And  the  whole  scheme  of  necessity  advocated 
by  Edwards,  and  before  him  by  many  of  the  Reformers,  while  de- 
fending human  freedom  and  accountability,  is  at  the  same  time  cer- 

*  Quoted  from  Harless'  Christian  Ethics. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  759 

tainly  chargeable  with  inconsistency,  if  not,  indeed,  involving  God, 
at  least  by  indirection,  in  the  existence  of  sin.  To  reconcile  such  a 
theory  of  necessity  with  moral  accountability  is  even  more  difficult, 
since  it  involves  a  contradiction,  than  to  harmonize  the  existence  of 
sin  in  God's  universe  with  his  character.  That  sin  has  its  cause  in 
the  will  of  the  wicked  accounts  both  for  the  testimony  of  conscience 
and  the  divine  word  concerning  the  fact  of  human  guilt,  and  before 
this  clearly  established  truth  must  go  down  all  theories  that  would 
tend,  even  by  implication,  to  impair  either.  Rut  that  sin  exists  as  a 
fact  in  the  divine  government  of  the  universe,  and  that  God  neither 
caused  nor  approves  it  is  another,  though  a  related  question,  which 
will  not  retire  before  the  presence  of  any  of  the  schemes  referred  to. 
In  the  construction  of  the  theodicy  validity  must  be  allowed  alike  to 
the  holy  sovereignty  of  God  and  the  fact  of  sin  as  opposed  to  and 
hated  of  God.  Manichaeism  already  noticed  in  its  view  as  to  the 
origin  of  evil,  is  wholly  unable  to  form  a  theodicy,  or  even  to  at- 
tempt a  vindication  of  the  divine  character.  Sin  has  existed  from 
eternity,  and  of  necessity  has  place  in  the  world.  Ii>  fact  this  came 
into  being  through  the  agency  of  Satan  no  less  than  of  God,  and  be- 
longs to  and  inheres  in  the  original  constitution  of  the  word. 
Active  in  its  creation  it  remains  active  in  its  subsequent  history. 
Bayle,  one  of  its  ablest  defenders  in  modern  times,  accepts  the  theory 
of  dualism  as  the  most  plausible  method  of  accounting  for  the  exist- 
ence and  prevalence  of  evil.  Any  one  possessing  even  a  slight  ac- 
quaintance with  his  Philosophical  Dictionary,  that  masterpiece  of 
learning,  cannot  fail  to  feel  interested  in  his  skillful  defence  and  de- 
lineation of  the  theory.  But  at  the  same  time,  how  like  a  play  at 
dialectics  seems  the  whole  argument !  He  characterizes  it  as  a  "  false 
tenet,  more  ancient  than  Manes,  and  that  it  cannot  be  maintained  by 
any  one,  who  admits  the  Holy  Scriptures,  either  in  whole  or  in 
part."  But  that  he  did  not  believe  it  is  evident  from  his  own  lan- 
guage. He  has  "  exhausted  the  resources  of  his  genius,  as  well  as 
the  rich  stores  of  his  learning,  in  order  to  adorn  the  doctrine  of  this 
arch-heretic,  and  to  render  it  more  plausible,  if  possible,  than  any 
other  which  has  been  employed  to  explain  the  origin  and  existence 
of  evil.  But  this  was  not  because  he  sincerely  believed  it  to  be 
founded  in  truth.  He  merely  wished  to  show  its  superiority  to 
other  schemes,  in  order  that  by  demolishing  it  he  might  the  more 
effectually  inspire  the  minds  of  men  with  a  dark  feeling  of  universal 


76o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

skepticism.  It  was  decorated  by  him,  not  as  a  system  of  truth,  but 
as  a  sacrifice  to  be  offered  up  on  the  altar  of  atheism.  True  to  the 
instincts  of  his  philosophy,  he  sought  on  this  subject,  as  well  as  on  all 
others,  to  extinguish  the  light  of  science,  and  manifest  the  wonders 
of  his  power,  by  hanging  round  the  wretched  habitation  of  man  the 
gloom  of  eternal  despair."  *  No,  on  this  basis  God  is  neither 
just,  good,  nor  all-powerful.  He  is  engaged  in  a  conflict  which  has 
neither  beginning  nor  end,  and  to  espouse  this  theory  in  explana- 
tion of  the  mysterious  problems  of  human  life  is  to  enter  a  vortex 
that  can  only  precipitate  into  a  state  of  complete  despair,  or  skep- 
ticism. It  is  recorded  as  one  of  the  triumphs  of  Christianity  that 
this  dark  and  gloomy  scheme  no  longer  casts  its  baleful  shadows 
upon  humanity. 

Among  the  various  methods  employed  to  reconcile  the  existence 
of  sin  with  the  character  of  God,  none  has  been  perhaps  more  gen- 
erally accepted  among  the  educated  than  that  of  Optimism.  Its 
fundamental  principle,  as  stated  by  Dugald  Stewart,  is  this,  "That 
all  events  are  ordered  for  the  best;  and  that  evils  which  we  suffer 
are  parts  of  a  great  system  conducted  by  almighty  power  under  the 
direction  of  infinite  wisdom  and  goodness."  This  speculation, 
which  with  certain  important  modifications,  contains  no  little  truth, 
is  almost  coincident  with  critical  thought.  There  is  a  remarkable 
passage  in  Lactantius,  containing  an  objection  of  Epicurus,  with  the 
reply  of  this  author.  It  so  aptly  states  the  argument  of  the  ob- 
jector, as  well  as  the  reply  of  the  Optimist,  that  we  make  no  apology 
for  introducing  it  here.  It  runs  as  follows:  "  God,  says  Epicurus, 
is  either  willing  to  remove  evil,  and  is  not  able :  or  he  is  able  and  not 
willing:  or  he  is  neither  willing,  nor  able:  or  he  is  both  willing  and 
able.  If  he  is  willing  and  not  able,  he  must  then  be  weak,  which 
cannot  be  affirmed  of  God.  If  he  is  able  and  not  willing,  he  must 
be  envious,  which  is  likewise  contrary  to  the  nature  of  God.  If  he 
is  neither  willing  nor  able,  he  must  be  both  envious  and  weak,  and 
consequently  not  God.  If  he  is  both  willing  and  able,  which  only 
can  agree  with  the  notion  of  God,  whence  then  proceeds  evil?  Or 
why  does  he  not  remove  it?"  "I  know,"  and  here  follows  the  re- 
ply of  Lactantius,  "that  the  greatest  part  of  philosophers,  who  assert 
a  providence,  are  commonly  embarrassed  with  this  argument,  and 
almost  forced   against  their  will  to  acknowledge  that  God   does  not 

*  Bledsoe's  Theodicy, 


vTHE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  761 

concern  himself  with  the  administration  of  the  world,  which  is  the 
very  thing  that  Epicurus  drives  at.  But  we  easily  overthrow  this 
formidable  argument  by  clear  reason.  For  God  can  do  whatsoever 
he  pleases,  and  there  is  no  weakness  or  wrong  in  him,  consequently 
he  is  able  to  remove  evil  but  is  not  willing,  and  yet  for  all  that  is  not 
envious.  He  docs  not  remove  evil  for  this  reason,  because  withal 
(as  I  have  shown)  he  bestows  wisdom,  and  there  is  more  good  and 
satisfaction  in  wisdom,  than  there  is  in  painfulness  in  evil.  By  wis- 
dom likewise  we  come  to  know  God,  and  by  that  knowledge  attain 
to  immortality,  which  is  the  chief  good.  And  therefore  unless  we 
first  know  evil  we  shall  not  be  able  to  know  good.  But  neither 
Epicurus  nor  any  other  observed  this :  if  evil  be  removed,  wisdom 
must  also  be  removed;  no  trace  of  virtue  will  remain;  because  virtue 
consists  in  bearing  with  an  overcoming  the  sharpness  of  evil.  And 
so,  for  the  small  advantage  of  the  removal  of  evil,  we  should  be  de- 
prived of  the  greatest,  the  most  real,  and  proper  good.  It  is  evi- 
dent, therefore,  that  all  things,  evil  as  well  as  good,  were  intended 
for  the  benefit  of  mankind."  *  It  is  true  that  the  objection,  as  well 
as  the  reply  to  it,  concerns  physical  evil,  but  the  argument  of  Epi- 
curus would  be  rather  strengthened  when  applied  to  the  existence 
of  sin.  As  to  the  reply  of  Lactantius,  what  a  complete  justification 
it  would  have  furnished  to  Eve  in  the  garden,  had  she  only  possessed 
a  knowledge  of  dialectics?  What  a  rejoinder  would  the  Almighty 
have  made  to  such  an  argument! 

But  "  in  fact,  it  would  almost  seem  as  if  here  were  a  case  where, 
turn  to  which  side  we  please,  there  meets  us  the  horn  of  a  dilemma. 
If  the  world  is  not  the  best  possible,  says  the  optimist,  God  cannot 
be  all-good.  But  if  the  world  be  the  best  possible,  the  best  that 
God  can  make, 'is  the  inference  not  just  as  good  that  God  cannot  be 
all-powerful?  Or,  rather,  is  the  true  inference  not  this,  that  we  are 
reasoning  in  a  region  too  high  for  us,  and  where  our  conclusions  are 
not  much  worth  one  way  or  another?  Then,  is  it  clear  that  there 
can  be  no  real  evil  in  the  world,  because  God  is  absolutely  good? 
May  it  not  merely  be  better  that  there  should  be  even  such  evil  than 
that  God  should  prevent  it  by  making  men  unable  to  do  it,  while 
yet  the  world  would  be  a  great  deal  better  than  it  is  if  men  did  no 
evil.  There  is  a  vast  difference  between  the  so-called  evils  of  the 
physical  world  and  the  evils  of  the   moral   world.     The  former  can 

*See  Paulicians,  Bayle'i  Phil.  Dictionary. 


762  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

be  shown  to  be  conducive  to  the  good  of  the  physical  system  as  a 
whole,  and  therefore  to  be  only  seemingly  evil.  The  latter  are  pro- 
nounced by  conscience  to  be  essentially  evil,  and  investigation  fails 
to  prove  that  they  have  any  rightful  place  in  the  world."*  Unques- 
tionably the  ablest  modern  defender  of  the  theory  is  Leibnitz,  the 
result  of  whose  speculations,  under  various  modifications,  lie  at  the 
basis  of  most  of  the  reasoning  upon  this  subject.  The  oriental 
Manichasism  made  freedom  itself  the  evil  principle,  while  western 
thought  finds  its  necessity  in  the  relation  of  liberty  to  nature,  and 
regards  it  as  the  necessary  transition  from  a  state  of  nature  to  that 
of  culture.  This  was  the  view  of  Hegel  and  Schleiermacher,  who 
brought  to  its  defence  their  almost  unequaled  analytic  research, 
while  to  Schiller  belongs  the  work  of  clothing  the  theory  in  the  at- 
tractive garb  of  poetry.  According  to  this  no  progress  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  world  is  possible  or  conceivable  without  antagonism,  and 
what  presents  itself  to  finite  knowledge  as  evil,  would,  were  the 
whole  world-plan  within  our  comprehension,  bejustified  by  the  high- 
est wisdom  and  goodness.  All  that  exists  and  occurs  belongs  to 
that  "pre-established  harmony,"  which  consists  with  the  entire  uni- 
verse of  God.  Evil  has  its  just  place  in  the  divine  order,  and  con- 
stitutes an  integral  part  of  the  world-plan.  But  against  this  theory 
in  all  its  forms  stand  the  testimony  of  conscience,  tiie  facts  of  human 
experience  and  observation,  and  above  all  the  revealed  word  of  God. 
To  affirm  that  this  "  present  evil  world  "  is  the  best  world  is  to  make 
sin  necessary  that  salvation  may  abound,  yea,  is  to  charge  God  him- 
self with  "  doing  evil  that  good  may  come."  Verily,  a  theodicy 
built  on  such  a  foundation  cannot  stand  in  the  light  of  revelation,  or 
purified  reason.      Rather  no  attempt  at  an  explanation  than  this. 

But  just  what  is  the  nature  and  the  limit  of  our  knowledge  in  this 
domain  ?  That  God  is  good  both  his  word  and  works  attest.  That 
sin  exists  is  no  less  a  truth  of  revelation  than  of  experience  and  ob- 
servation. Along  with  the  evidences  of  the  divine  goodness  are 
those  of  the  existence  and  prevalence  of  sin,  and  these  latter  often 
so  predominating  as  to  excite  doubt  concerning  the  providence  of  a 
good  God.  The  pessimist  has  no  little  to  justify  his  views,  for  apart 
from  the  salvation  in  Christ,  and  confining  the  judgment  to  the  pres- 
ent order  and  state,  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether  more  of  good 
than  evil  exists.     The  optimist  avers,  that  could  we  occupy  a  suffi- 

*  See  under  Optimism  in  Schaff-Herzog. 


*TIIE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  763 

ciently  comprehensive  standpoint,  and  overlook  the  whole  course  of 
human  life  and  history,  tlie  evil  that  exists,  tocjcther  with  the  death 
that  reigns  and  revels  amid  so  much  pain  and  disorder  on  this  lower 
plane,  would  be  found  to  contribute  to  the  highest  happiness  and 
well-being  of  the  whole,  that  what  appears  here  as  a  tragedy  would 
then  bear  the  aspect  of  a  diviiia  comedia.  What  we  have  is  only 
the  apparent  discord  that  belongs  rather  to  the  uncultivated  ear, 
while  in  that  higher  realm  all  the  antiphonies  of  the  universe  blend 
in  sweet  and  perfect  harmony.  The  pessimist,  on  the  contrary,  af- 
firms that  all  apparent  good  is  only  evil  in  disguise,  and  that  the 
seeming  happiness  of  individuals,  classes,  and  nations  is  purchased, 
and  always,  at  the  sacrifice  of  others,  that  the  particular  good  is  not 
good  from  the  view-point  of  the  whole,  and  that  could  the  vision  be 
had  from  this  high  vantage  ground  men  would  themselves  appear 
the  "puppets  of  providence,"  the  world  a  scene  of  confusion,  and 
universal  nature  nothing  more  than  the  domain  of  conflict,  pain  and 
death.  Looking  upon  this  scene  Schopenhauer  was  led  to  exclaim: 
"What!  this  world  created  of  God!  Rather  is  it  the  work  of  the 
Devil!  Of  Pessimism  it  has  been  truly  said,  "  that  it  can  only  flour- 
ish in  pantheistic  soil.  The  belief  that  existence  is  essentially  evil 
can  never  spring  from  a  true  theism."  And  again :  "  If  there  be  a 
personal  God,  a  moral  law,  and  a  heavenly  life,  pessimism  must  man- 
ifestly be  rejected.  If  there  be  no  proof  of  these  things  it  cannot 
be  conclusively  refuted." 

But  the  question  still  returns  upon  us,  why  did  not  God  prevent 
the  introduction  of  evil?  Or,  inasmuch  as  he  hates  it,  why  has  he 
permitted  it?  Maintaining  the  infinite  power  of  God,  as  also  his 
infinite  aversion  to  sin,  is  it  not  a  mystery  passing  all  human  com- 
prehension that  he  at  any  moment  should  allow  its  existence  in  his 
world?  It  has  certainly  not  occurred  without  his  knowledge,  any 
more  than  beyond  the  reach  of  his  power.  While  sin  was  not  a 
factor  in  the  divine  world-plan,  its  possibility  was  present  to  the 
mind  of  God  from  eternity.  And  since  it  was  within  the  divine 
foreknowledge  its  existence  was  recognized  in  the  secret  counsels  of 
God.  But  sin  as  an  actuality  neither  exists  by  right  of  necessity, 
nor  from  the  divine  decree,  nor  that  the  love  of  God  might  be  mani- 
fested in  its  forgiveness  and  removal.  In  the  second  person  of  the 
Godhead  there  was  existent  a  way  of  redemption  from  its  conse- 
quences and  power,  but  the  Son  does  not  owe   his   place  in  the 


764  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

essential  Trinity  either  to  the  possibility  or  actuality  of  sin  in  the 
universe.  The  divine  decrees  must  be  viewed  both  as  conditioned 
and  unconditioned;  viewed,  we  repeat,  not  as  accommodating  a 
mysterious  subject  to  our  weak  comprehension,  but  as  corresponding 
to  what  actually  exists  in  the  mind  of  God.  Here  place  is  left  for 
the  determination  of  the  free  creature,  and  whatever  be  the  nature  of 
his  decision  regarding  the  gift  of  created  liberty  it  does  not  occur 
without  the  divine  mind,  or  place  the  subject  beyond  the  reach  .of 
the  all-embracing  divine  counsels.  The  love  of  God  in  redemption 
does  indicate  a  new  refraction,  but  that  love  would  have  shone  forth 
with  infinite  splendor  had  sin  never  found  place  in  the  world.  Then 
since  a  way  of  restoration  from  sin  existed  with  God  from  eternity 
he  could  in  infinite  wisdom  create  a  being  whose  fall  was  not  only 
possible,  but  which  would  be  followed  with  sorrow  and  death 
bequeathed  to  the  face  of  man.  To  the  question,  whence  and  why 
moral  evil?  This  answer  may  be  given,  "What  God  absolutely 
wills  not,  but  on  the  contrary,  hates  and  punishes,  he  could  not 
wholly  have  prevented,  without  annihilating  that  human  freedom, 
willed  and  conferred  by  himself"*  Does  this  set  a  limit  to  the 
divine  power?  We  reply,  yes,  and  no!  Yes,  since  he  would  not 
by  a  mere  act  of  external  power  repress  that  freedom  conferred  by 
himself;  no,  inasmuch  as  he  himself  places  a  limit  to  his  power  in 
giving  existence  to  a  creature  possessed  of  liberty.  He  could  not 
because  he  would  not  prevent  evil  by  doing  violence  to  his  own 
work.  God  may  not  put  forth  the  hand  of  his  power  to  hinder  the 
free  act  of  man,  but  he  can  and  will  lay  hold  on  the  infinite  resources 
within  his  own  being  to  repair  the  evil  introduced,  and  cause  his 
grace  and  wisdom  to  abound  in  the  midst  of  the  reign  of  sin  and 
death.  Christianity  contains  the  sublimest  exhibition  of  the  divine 
power,  wisdom  and  love,  and  to  those  who  accept  it  there  belongs  a 
higher  and  more  distinguished  blessedness  than  could  have  been 
attained  by  the  unfallen  creature.  Neither  optimism  nor  pessimism 
is,  as  a  whole,  either  true  or  false.  Christianity  contains  the  truth 
of  both,  and  only  on  this  as  a  foundation  can  be  reared  a  theodicy 
alike  honoring  to  God,  and  at  the  same  time  affording  a  restful 
security  to  Christian  inquiry.  It  does  not  at  once  remove  evil  from 
the  world,  nor  even  the  power  of  sin  from  the  human  heart.  Its 
condemnation   is  taken  away,   its  power   broken  here  in  the  flesh, 

*  Van  Oosterzee,  Christian  Dogmatics,  p.  341. 


THE    CAUSE    OF    SIN.  765 

while  it  promises  in  the  Hfe  to  come  complete  release.  To  the 
Christian  all  that  exists  may  contribute  to  his  advancement  in  virtue 
and  his  higher  blessedness  in  heaven.  "  For  our  light  affliction, 
which  is  but  for  a  moment,  worketh  for  us  a  far  more  exceeding  and 
eternal  weight  of  glory."  Be  it  sorrow  or  pain  in  any  form  or  to 
any  degree,  joy  or  grief,  experience  of  sin  in  the  conflict  of  life,  or 
increasing  hope  of  glory,  be  it  tribulation  or  death — all,  under  divine 
grace,  contributes  to  his  future  glory.  And  since  Christianity  is  a 
universal  religion,  and  is  intended  of  God  for  all  men,  it  alone  affords 
a  sure  hope  to  humanity,  and  supplies  an  answer  to  the  main 
inquiry.  In  the  light  of  this  we  can  magnify  the  wisdom  and  love  of 
God  in  our  estate  of  sin  and  sorrow,  and  "joy  in  tribulation  also; 
knowing  that  tribulation  worketh  patience;  and  patience,  experi- 
ence; and  experience,  hope." 

But  there  is  still  much  that  remains  dark  and  mysterious,  even 
though  the  light  abounds  about  our  pathway.  There  are  questions 
upon  which  Christianity  throws  no  light,  or  that  light  is  so  dim  that 
we  cannot  venture  to  walk  with  confidence  in  it.  When  the  cross 
of  the  Son  of  God  is  seen  then  all  is  clear,  but  before  how  many  has 
that  cross  never  been  lifted  up?  and  in  the  midst  of  the  gross  dark- 
ness that  still  hangs  over  the  world  sin  and  death  appear  as  prob- 
lems whose  solution  we  are  unable  to  discover.  But  standing  in 
the  knowledge  we  possess,  and  in  which  we  rejoice  despite  the  sur- 
rounding darkness,  the  assurance  that  God  reigns  in  righteousness 
and  holy  love  affords  a  sure  support.  What  we  cannot  understand 
we  leave  to  his  infinite  wisdom,  and  even  in  what  now  troubles  and 
confuses  our  weak  and  darkened  comprehension,  we  rest  in  the  sure 
and  sweet  hope  that  "  he  doeth  all  things  well,"  and  that  in  the 
future  life  his  government  will  stand  fully  justified  in  the  sight  of 
men  and  angels. 

"  Finally,  the  history  of  the  world  and  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
gives  us  to  see  an  apprpximation,  slow  indeed,  and  frequently  inter- 
rupted, but  yet  constant,  towards  this  glorious  end.  The  world's 
history  is  the  world's  judgment,  but  that  judgment  at  the  same  time 
a  continual  world-restoration,  which  ceases  not  until  the  closing 
word  of  creation's  history  (Gen.  i.  31)  shall  have  become  also  that 
of  the  annals  of  the  divine  government.  Nothing  is  more  hopeless 
than  to  oppose  this  work  of  God,  nothing  more  blessed  than  will- 
ingly to  advance  it.     When  finally  it  shall  be  manifestly  completed — 


"](i(>  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

and  in  principle  it  is  so  already  for  the  eye  of  faith — the  nil  inirari 
will  be  no  longer  possible,  and  wonder  more  than  ever  be  recog- 
nized   not    simply  as  m-  (l>iAoao(piag,  but    also    as  r^c  rrpoaKwr/asug  apxv the 

beginning  not  only  of  philosophy,  but  also  of  adoration.  In  the 
words  of  the  great  Dutch  poet.  Da  Costa : 

"At  the  confines  of  the  ages,  sees  my  eye  the  spirit  of  evil 
Vanquished  and  disarmed,  for  rebellion  no  more  able, 
When  the  Lord  God  in  all  things  and  in  all  is  all. 
Will  it  light  be,  ever  light  be,  light  of  light  and  darkness  born."* 

*  Van  Oosterzee's  Christian  Dogmatics,  p.  352. 


ARTICLE  XX. 


THE  RELATION  OF  FAITH 
AND  GOOD  WORKS. 

BY  E.  HUBER,  D.  D. 


We  are  falsely  accused  of  having  prohibited  good  works;  but  our  writings 
on  the  Ten  Commandments  and  other  subjects  show  that  we  have  given  good 
and  useful  instructions  and  admonitions  in  respect  to  various  Christian  relations, 
duties  and  works ;  respecting  which,  prior  to  this  time,  little  had  been  taught, 
but  almost  every  sermon  urged  continually  the  necessity  of  puerile  and  need- 
less works — as  rosaries,  worship  of  saints,  monastic  vows,  pilgrimages,  stated 
fasts,  holidays,  fraternities,  etc.  Works  so  needless  even  our  opponents  do  not 
extol  so  highly  now  as  formerly ;  besides,  they  have  also  learned  to  treat  of 
faith  now,  concerning  which  in  former  times  they  preached  nothing  at  all ;  they 
teach  now,  however,  that  we  are  not  justified  before  God  by  works  alone,  but 
add  faith  in  Christ,  saying  faith  and  works  justify  us  before  God — a  doctrine 
which  may  afford  more  consolation  than  one  teaching  confidence  in  works 
alone. 

Now  the  doctrine  concerning  faith,  which  is  the  principal  Article  in  the 
Christian  Creed,  not  having  been  inculcated  for  so  long  a  time,  as  all  must 
confess,  but  the  doctrine  concerning  works  alone  having  been  preached  every- 
where, the  following  instructions  on  this  subject  are  offered  by  our  divines : 

First,  that  our  works  cannot  reconcile  us  to  God  and  merit  grace,  but  these 
things  are  effected  through  faith  alone,  if  we  believe  that  our  sins  are  forgiven 
us  for  Christ's  sake,  who  alone  is  the  Mediator,  reconciling  the  Father.  He, 
therefore,  that  expects  to  effect  this  reconciliation  by  works,  and  to  merit  grace, 
contemns  Christ  and  seeks  a  way  of  his  own  to  God,  contrary  to  the  Gospel. 

This  doctrine  of  faith  is  clearly  and  explicitly  inculcated  by  Paul  in  many 
places,  especially  in  Ephes.  ii.  8,  9.  "  By  grace  are  ye  saved,  through  faith ; 
and  that  not  of  yourselves ;  it  is  the  gift  of  God;  not  of  works,  lest  any  man 
should  boast,"  etc.  And  that  a  new  signification  is  not  introduced  here,  may 
be  shown  from  Augustine,  who  has  treated  this  subject  carefully,  and  who  in 
like  manner  teaches,  that  we  obtain  grace  and  are  justified  before  God,  through 

767 


y6S  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

faith  in  Christ,  and  not  by  works,  as  his  whole  book,  "  De  Spiritu  et  Literal' 
clearly  shows.  Although  this  doctrine  is  despised  very  much  by  the  thought- 
less, yet  it  will  be  found  that  it  is  very  consoling  and  salutary  to  timid  and  alarmed 
consciences  ;  for  our  consciences  cannot  secure  tranquillity  and  peace  by  works, 
but  through  faith  alone,  when  they  feel  in  themselves  an  assurance,  that  for 
Christ's  sake  they  have  a  merciful  God,  as  Paul  says,  Rom.  v.  i:  "  Being  jus- 
tified by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God."  Heretofore  this  consolation  was  not 
administered  in  sermons,  but  the  wretched  consciences  of  men  were  driven 
upon  works  of  their  own,  and  various  works  were  taken  in  hand ;  for  conscience 
drove  some  into  monasteries,  with  the  hope  of  acquiring  grace  there  by  a  mon- 
astic life ;  others  devised  works  of  another  kind,  for  the  purpose  of  meriting  grace 
and  of  making  satisfaction  for  sins.  Many  of  these  have  experienced,  that 
peace  could  not  be  secured  by  these  things.  It  was,  for  this  reason,  necessary 
to  preach  and  enforce  with  diligence  this  doctrine  of  faith  in  Christ,  that  it 
might  be  known  that  through  faith  alone,  without  merit,  the  grace  of  God  is 
secured. 

It  is  also  inculcated,  that  the  faith  here  spoken  of  is  not  the  faith  which  devils 
and  the  ungodly  possess,  who  believe  the  historical  fact  that  Christ  has  suffered 
and  risen  from  the  dead ;  but  it  is  the  iriw  faith — the  faith  which  believes  that 
we  obtain  grace  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ.  And  hence,  who- 
ever knows  that  he  has  a  merciful  God  through  Christ,  knows  God,  calls  upon 
him,  and  is  not  without  God,  like  the  Gentiles.  For  the  devil  and  the  ungodly 
do  not  believe  the  article  concerning  the  remission  of  sins;  for  this  reason  they 
are  enemies  to  God,  unable  to  call  upon  him,  or  to  hope  for  anything  good 
from  him  ;  and,  as  just  now  shown,  the  Scripture,  speaking  of  faith,  does  not 
style  faith  such  a  knowledge  as  devils  and  wicked  men  possess ;  for  it  is  taught 
concerning  faith,  in  Heb.  xi.  i,  that  to  have  merely  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  of 
history  is  not  faith,  but  to  have  confidence  in  God  that  we  shall  receive  his 
promises.  And  Augustine  also  reminds  us  that  we  should  understand  the 
word  faith  in  Scripture,  to  mean  a  confidence  in  God  that  he  is  merciful  to  us, 
and  not  a  mere  knowledge  of  the  fact — a  knowledge  which  devils  also  possess. 

It  is  taught  further  that  good  works  should  and  must  be  performed,  not  with 
a  view  of  placing  confidence  in  them  as  meriting  grace,  but  in  accordance  with 
his  will,  and  for  the  glory  of  God.  Faith  alone  constantly  secures  grace  and 
forgiveness  of  sins.  And  because  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given  through  faith,  the 
heart  becomes  qualified  to  perform  good  works.  For  before  this,  while  it  is 
without  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  is  too  weak  ;  besides,  it  is  in  the  power  of  Satan,  who 
urges  frail  human  nature  to  many  sins  ;  as  we  see  among  the  philosophers,  who 
resolving  to  live  honorably  and  unblamably,  were  unable  to  effect  it,  and  fell 
into  many  great  and  open  sins.  So  it  happens  with  all  men  who  attempt, 
without  true  faith  and  without  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  govern  themselves  by  their 
own  strength  alone.  Wherefore,  the  doctrine  concerning  faith  does  not  deserve 
censure  as  discouraging  good  works,  but  should  much  rather  be  applauded  as 
teaching  the  performance  of  good  works,  and  as  offering  assistance  by  which 
good  works  may  be  performed.  For  without  faith,  and  out  of  Christ,  the  na- 
ture and  ability  of  man  are  much  too  weak  to  do  good  works,  to  call  upon  God, 
to  have  patience  in  sufferings,  to  love  his  neighbor,  faithfully  to  execute  com- 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  769 

missions,  to  be  obedient,  to  avoid  evil  lusts.  Such  exalted  and  righteoas 
works  cannot  be  performed  without  the  assistance  of  Christ,  as  he  himself  says, 
John  XV.  5,  "Without  me,  ye  can  do  nothing." 

THE  Article  which  it  falls  to  our  lot  to  consider  at  this  time  is 
an  answer  to  the  charge  of  prohibiting  good  works — a  charge 
of  sufficiently  serious  character  to  warrant  the  full  and  earnest  reply- 
made  to  it  by  our  Confessors  at  Augsburg.  For,  if  substantiated, 
it  overthrows  our  doctrine  concerning  justification  by  faith,  and  thus 
deprives  us  of  our  chief  reason  for  existing  as  a  distinct  church, 
destroys  the  main  foundation  upon  which  our  superstructure  is 
reared,  cuts  the  central  root  that  gives  subsistence  and  richness  to 
our  life,  and  leaves  us  as  witnesses  of  God  in  the  unenviable  position 
of  persons  occupying  the  various  thoroughfares  of  life  cruelly  and 
wickedly  engaged  in  showing  men,  who  ask  the  way  to  heaven,  into 
the  broad  road  that  leads  to  death  and  hell. 

This  charge  is  one  that  was  very  common  in  the  time  of  the 
Reformation,  but  is  not  confined  to  that  period,  as  it  continues  to  be 
repeated  even  to  this  day,  and  that  not  by  Catholics  only,  but  fre- 
quently also  by  Protestants  themselves.  On  this  account  we  pro- 
pose to  consider  this  Article  independently  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  it  originated,  and  irrespective  of  time,  place  or  creed 
accord  the  privilege  of  a  hearing  to  all  who,  expressly  or  by  impli- 
cation, have  anything  to  say  in  substantiation  of  the  immoral  effects 
of  our  teaching  on  the  subject  of  faith. 

In  the  first  place,  let  us  seek  to  attain  to  a  definite  understanding 
of  the  nature  of  the  offence  with  which  we  stand  charged.  "Our 
writers,"  says  the  Article  itself,  "are  falsely  accused  of  prohibiting 
good  works."  Now  by  good  works  here  are  not  meant  the  unprofit- 
able things  generally  understood  by  the  term  in  its  technical  Romish 
sense,  but  everything  whatever  that  God  has  commanded  us  to  become 
and  to  do  in  his  word;  not  the  works  justly  characterized  by  our  Arti- 
cle as  childish  and  needless,  such  "  as  keeping  of  holidays,  set  fasts 
fraternities,  pilgrimages,  worshiping  of  saints,  the  use  of  rosaries, 
monkery,  and  such  like  things,"  but  the  moral  virtues,  the  fruits  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  righteous  conduct  and  Christian  life  thence 
proceeding. 

Now  these  works,  thus  understood,  they  accuse  us  of  forbidding. 
By  this,  however,  they  do  not  mean  to  charge  us  with  disapproving 
and  condemninti  the  cood  works  themselves,  and  therefore  discoun- 


']']0  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

tenancing  and  opposing  them  for  their  own  sake,  but,  that  we  hold 
and  teach  such  views  concerning  justification  as  virtually  and  prac- 
tically amounts  to  the  prohibition  of  the  very  graces  and  duties 
enjoined  by  God  himself 

The  attack,  accordingly,  is  aimed  at  the  very  citadel  of  our  Pro- 
testant faith — the  Article  gloried  in  as  the  one  with  which  the  Church 
stands  or  falls;  and  the  charge  of  prohibiting  good  works  is  merely 
the  weapon  with  which  our  stronghold  is  to  be  demolished — the 
evidence  that  justification  as  taught  by  us  is  an  invention  of  man 
and  not  a  truth  of  the  word  that  endureth  forever. 

That  the  point  of  assault  is  where  we  have  represented,  is  evident 
from  the  whole  contents  of  our  Article,  which  is,  from  beginning  to 
end,  a  setting  forth  and  defence  of  the  doctrine  of  faith:  as  also  from 
the  Romish  Confutation  in  which  this  Article  of  our  Confession  is 
entirely  rejected  on  the  ground  that  it  teaches  "that  good  works  do 
not  merit  the  remission  of  sins." 

Understanding  now  what  the  indictment  is  which  is  preferred 
against  us,  let  us  ascertain  what  proof  they  propose  to  furnish  to 
sustain  the  same.  The  arguments  mainly  relied  on  to  convict  us  of 
guilt  may  be  reduced  to  the  three  following:  i.  The  manners  and 
lives  of  those  who  hold  that  we  are  justified  by  faith,  are  corrupt 
and  ungodly;  therefore  the  doctrine  itself  must  be  false  and  immoral. 
2.  In  various  passages  in  which  faith  is  spoken  of,  the  leading  Re- 
formers have  plainly  and  expressly  declared  that  good  works  are  of 
no  consequence  if  only  men  do  not  cease  to  believe.  3.  The  logical 
and  inevitable  tendency  of  the  doctrine  that  faith  alone  justifies,  is 
to  produce  indifference  to  righteousness  and  holiness;  Tor  if  by  faith, 
without  the  deeds  of  the  law,  we  are  forgiven,  accepted  of  God,  and 
made  heirs  of  eternal  life,  then  we  have  need  of  nothing  further. 
Or,  as  Luther  himself  has  put  this  last  objection,  "  If  faith  does 
everything  and  by  itself  suffices  for  our  justification,  why  then  are 
good  works  commanded?" 

That  the  three  specified  propositions  contain  the  substance  of  the 
arguments  ordinarily  employed  in  support  of  the  charge  that  the 
Protestant  view  of  justification  discourages  morality,  may  be  seen 
from  the  following  specific  statements  and  facts  gathered  from  vari- 
ous sources. 

Cardinal  Bellarmine,  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  Roman  Catholic 
theologians  and  controversialists,  who  lived  in  the  latter  half  of  the 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  77 1 

1 6th  century  and  a  part  of  the  17th,  is  quoted  by  Bishop  Davenant 
of  the  EngUsh  Church,  as  follows:  "We  prove  that  Luther  used  to 
deny  the  necessity  of  good  works,  from  the  lives  and  manners  of 
his  followers :  who,  in  consequence  of  this  teaching,  abandoned  them- 
selves to  all  wickedness  with  such  incredible  licentiousness  that  it 
became  quite  needful  for  Luther  to  praise  good  works  and  to  exhort 
to  the  practice  of  them."  Here  the  excessive  wickedness  said  to  be 
prevalent  among  the  followers  of  the  great  Reformer,  is  boldly 
ascribed  to  the  peculiar  doctrine  taught  by  him  in  opposition  to  that 
of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Archbishop  Spalding,  of  this  country,  in  his  History  of  the  Pro- 
testant Reformation,  devotes  a  long  chapter  to  the  influence  of  the 
Reformation  on  morals.  In  this  he  professes  to  give  an  analysis  of 
the  testimony  of  the  leading  Reformers  themselves  as  to  the  practi- 
cal moral  results  of  their  own  teaching.  This  testimony  is  gathered 
by  the  Dublin  Rcviezv  from  a  work  by  Dr.  Dollinger,  and  inserted  by 
Spalding  in  the  chapter  referred  to.  Luther  is  the  first  and  most 
important  witness.  He  testifies  as  follows  :  "  Everything  is  reversed, 
the  world  grows  worse  every  day  for  this  teaching;  and  the  misery 
of  it  is  that  men  are  nowadays  more  covetous,  more  hard-hearted, 
more  corrupt,  more  licentious,  and  more  wicked,  than  of  old  under 
the  papacy.  *  *  *  Our  evangelicals  are  now  sevenfold  more  wicked 
than  they  were  before.  In  proportion  as  we  hear  the  gospel,  we 
steal,  lie,  cheat,  gorge,  swell,  and  commit'every  crime."  The  writer 
of  the  article  in  the  Reviexv  further  adds  that  "  it  could  hardly  be 
expected  that  Luther  would  himself  attribute  this  universal  deprav- 
ity, the  presence  of  which  he  thus  frankly  acknowledges,  to  the  in- 
fluence of  his  own  gospel.  But  he  cannot  and  does  not  conceal 
that  such  was  the  popular  impression  concerning  Jt.  *  *  *  In- 
deed, not  to  multiply  evidence  of  a  fact  so  notorious,  he  himself  ac- 
knowledges that  the  peasants,  through  the  influence  of  the  gospel ; 
have  become  utterly  beyond  restraint,  and  think  they  may  do  as  they 
please.  They  no  longer  fear  hell  or  purgatory,  but  content  them- 
selves by  saying,  'I  believe,  therefore  I  shall  be  saved;'  and  they 
become  proud,  stiff-necked  mammonists  and  accursed  misers,  suck- 
ing the  very  substance  of  the  country  and  the  people." 

Not  having  access  to  the  work  of  DoUinger's  from  which  the  ex- 
tract is  collected,  we  are  not  in  a  position  to  verify  it  by  comparison 
with  Luther's  writings;  but,  damaging  as  the  testimony  may  be,  we 


']"]'!  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

presume  its  genuineness  must  be  admitted  from  the  character  of  the 
several  writers,  from  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  style,  which  is 
evidently  that  of  Luther,  as  also  from  the  fact  that  the  state  of  thnigs 
described  is  confirmed  by  statements  derived  from  Protestant  sources, 
as,  for  example,  that  of  Kostlin,  which  will  be  given  a  little  further 
on. 

Melanchthon  is  next  called  up,  and  he  bears  witness  as  follows: 
"  In  these  latter  times  the  world  has  taken  to  itself  a  boundless 
license;  very  many  are  so  unbridled  as  to  throw  off  every  bond 
of  discipline,  though  at  the  same  time  they  pretend  that  they  have 
faith,  that  they  invoke  God  with  true  fervor  of  heart,  and  that  they 
are  lively  and  elect  members  of  the  church;  living  meanwhile  in 
truly  Cyclopean  indifference  and  barbarism  and  in  slavish  subjection, 
and  adulteries,  murders  and  atrocious  crimes." 

This  frightful  state  of  morality,  according  to  the  authority  from 
whom  Spalding  quotes,  "  is  attributed  without  disguise  even  by  the 
Lutherans  themselves  to  the  doctrines  of  Luther  already  alluded  to." 

Kostlin,  the  Protestant  author  of  a  recent  life  of  Luther,  gives  a 
picture  of  the  spiritual  condition  of  Wittenberg,  the  very  centre  of 
Protestant  light  and  life,  but  little  less  dark  than  the  representations 
given  in  Spalding's  awful  chapter.  He  says,  "  But  more  painful  and 
harrassing  to  him  (Luther)  than  even  the  threats  of  the  Romanists 
and  the  attacks  upon  his  teaching,  which  his  own  words,  he  was 
convinced,  had  long  since  refuted,  was  the  condition  of  Wittenberg 
and  the  university.  It  was  a  favorite  reproach  against  him  of  the 
Catholics  that  his  doctrine  yielded  no  fruits  of  strict  morality.  Not- 
withstanding all  the  rebukes  which  he  had  uttered  for  years,  we  hear 
of  the  old  vices  still  rampant  at  Wittenberg — the  vices  of  gluttony, 
of  increasing  intemperance  and  luxury,  especially  at  baptisms  and 
weddings:  of  pride  in  dress  and  the  low-cut  bodices  of  ladies;  of 
rioting  in  the  streets;  of  the  low  women  who  corrupted  the  students; 
of  extortion,  deceit,  and  usury  in  trade;  and  of  the  indifference  and 
inability  of  the  authorities  and  the  police  to  put  down  open  immo- 
rality and  misdemeanors."  Elsewhere  the  fact  is  mentioned  that 
the  condition  of  things  described  by  Kostlin  was  so  intolerable  to 
Luther  that  he  had  made  up  his  mind  to  quit  the  place,  and  was 
with  difficulty  dissuaded  from  this  purpose  "by  the  united  interces- 
sions of  the  Elector  and  of  the  authorities  of  the  university  and  of 
the  town." 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  ']']}, 

From  the  admirable  work  of  Archdeacon  Hare  on  Luther  we 
learn  that  even  the  character  of  the  great  Reformer  himself  was  fre- 
quently assailed  in  the  Church  of  England,  for  the  purpose  of  bring- 
ing discredit  upon  the  peculiar  truths  brought  to  light  and  so  ably 
and  successfully  established  by  his  voice  and  pen.  The  period  re- 
ferred to  is  the  second  quarter  of  the  present  century — a  period  made 
memorable  in  the  English  Church  by  the  rise  and  spread  of  Tracta^ 
rianism  and  the  excited  controversies  that  broke  out  in  consequence. 

Referring  to  this  movement  Mr.  Hare  says  :  "  Moreover,  since  that 
disastrous  cloud  has  come  over  the  religious  minds  of  England, 
which  leads  so  many  of  our  divines  to  decry  the  Reformation  and 
its  authors,  the  most  unfounded  charges  against  Luther  have  found 
acceptance  with  many,  who  catch  them  up  with  a  parrot-like  volu- 
bility in  repeating  ugly  words.  Therefore,  seeing  that  Luther's 
character  is  so  closely  connected  with  that  of  the  Reformation,  it 
must  needs  seem  desirable  that  Luther's  name  should  be  cleared 
from  all  unmerited  stigmas." 

Again  near  the  close  of  this  volume  this  same  writer,  in  justify- 
ing the  size  to  which  his  book  had  grown,  says,  "  But  the  question 
of  Luther's  character  is  intimately  connected  with  the  miserable  con- 
troversies which  are  now  disturbing  our  church;  and  though  the 
decision  of  these  controversies  ought  to  turn  on  wholly  different 
points,  the  enemies  of  Protestant  truth  have  always  felt  they  were 
gaining  an  advantage,  if  they  could,  by  whatever  artifices,  detract 
from  the  fame  of  its  first  and  greatest  champion." 

Facts  such  as  those  thus  frir  given  show  very  plainh\  that  in  op- 
posing the  truth  concerning  justification,  the  adversaries  place  no 
little  dependence  upon  the  argument  based  upon  the  establishment 
of  the  immoral  character  of  its  advocates  and  professors. 

The  second  argument  relied  on  by  our  gainsayers  is  that  the  very 
leaders  of  the  Reformation  in  discussing  faith  have  said  e.xpressly 
that  good  works  are  of  no  consequence,  provided  only  that  men  do 
not  cease  to  believe.  The  inference  is  very  plain.  If  the  people  are 
taught  to  regard  faith  as  the  only  thing  that  is  essential,  and  good 
works  are  spoken  of  disparagingly  by  the  side  of  faith,  then  the 
neglect  of  the  moral  law  will  follow  as  a  natural  consequence. 

The  passages  relied  on  to  establish  the  fact  of  this  direct  and 
express  immoral  teaching  are,  however,  far  from  being  as  numerous 
and  plain  as  is  desirable  for  the  purpose  intended;  in  truth,  they  are 
SO 


774  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

significantly  few  when  it  is  remembered  how  ample  is  the  field  fi-om 
which  they  might  be  gathered,  Luther  alone  having  published  no 
less  than  seven  hundred  and  fifteen  different  works  during  his  life- 
time, "sending  them  forth  at  one  period,"  as  Mr.  Hare  says,  "  al- 
most like  flights  of  birds."  But  kw  as  they  are,  all  that  is  possible 
has  been  made  out  of  them  to  the  detriment  of  a  doctrine  humiliat- 
ing and  hateful  to  the  pride  and  self-righteousness  of  the  unrenewed 
heart.     But  let  us  hear  the  accusers  themselves. 

Cardinal  Bellarmine  says :  "  Protestants  think  that  man  can  be 
saved  although  he  does  no  good  works,  nor  observes  the  divine 
commands.  This  I  prove  from  the  words  of  Luther;  for  in  his  book 
on  Christian  Liberty  he  thus  writes:  'Good  works  do  not  make  a 
man  good,  nor  bad  ones  make  him  bad.'  Also,  in  another  passage 
he  says:  '  Where  there  is  faith,  no  sin  can  hurt.'"  Concerning  these 
extracts  Davenant  says  :  "These  and  other  things  of  the  same  kind, 
Bellarmine  has  scraped  together  from  parts  of  Luther's  writings,  to 
make  it  be  supposed  that  the  necessity  of  good  works  is  entirely  set 
aside  by  the  Reformer." 

Moehler,  theological  professor  at  Munich,  in  his  celebrated  work 
on  Symbolism,  cites  for  condemnation  the  following  passage  of  Lu- 
ther's from  his  "  Babylonish  Captivity:"  "  Now  thou  seest  how  rich 
is  the  Christian  or  the  baptized  man;  for  though  he  will,  he  cannot 
lose  his  salvation,  however  great  his  sins  may  be,  unless  he  refuse  to 
believe.     No  sin  can  damn  him  but  unbelief  alone." 

In  a  foot  note  this  same  author  gives  another  extract  from  a  letter 
by  Luther  to  Melanchthon  :  "Sin  lustily,  but  be  yet  more  lusty  in 
faith  and  rejoice  in  Christ,  who  is  the  conqueror  of  sin,  of  death, 
and  of  the  world.  Sin  we  must,  so  long  as  we  remain  here.  It 
suffices  that  through  the  riches  of  the  glory  of  God,  we  know  the 
Lamb  which  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world;  from  him  no  sin 
will  sever  us,  though  a  million  times  in  a  day  we  should  commit 
fornication  or  murder."  This  certainly  seems  to  grant  all  the  license 
to  sin  that  the  most  depraved  heart  could  ask  for. 

Nampon,  in  his  "  Catholic  Doctrine,"  quotes  the  same  passage, 
giving  parts  not  found  in  the  preceding  extract:  "  If  you  preach 
grace,  preach  the  reality  and  not  the  appearance  of  it;  if  grace  be  a 
reality,  bring  it  a  true  and  substantial  sin  (to  cure)  and  not  a  mere 
semblance  of  sin.  Sin  then  and  sin  stoutly,  but  still  more  stoutly 
trust  and  rejoice  in  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  the  conqueror  of  sin  and 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  775 

death  and  the  world."  Then  after  stating  that  sin.  however  often 
committed,  will  not  separate  us  from  Christ,  he  concludes  his  quota- 
tion with  the  following  sentence:  "Can  you  beheve  that  a  Lamb  so 
precious  has  not  superabundantly  paid  the  ransom  of  all  our  crimes?" 

Melanchthon  is  also  cited  by  these  two  authors  as  expressing  sen- 
timents almost  equally  as  objectionable  as  those  taken  from  Luther. 
These  extracts  are,  of  course,  produced  by  these  writers  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  that,  as  Moehler  expressed  it,  "  by  the  side  of  faith 
the  greatest  sins  can  be  committed." 

Again,  Moehler  in  his  chapter  on  good  works,  after  having  asserted 
that  we  deny  all  internal  connection  between  salvation  and  holiness, 
illustrates  and  supports  his  assertion  by  the  opposition  excited 
against  George  I\Lijor  for  teaching  that  good  works  are  necessary  to 
salvation.  Though  Major's  object  was  to  counteract  the  neglect  ot 
the  divine  precepts,  so  prevalent  among  members  of  the  church,  yet 
he  was  finally  obliged  to  give  up  the  use  of  this  form  of  expression. 

Melanchthon  also  at  one  time  approved  and  employed  this  same 
formula,  to  prevent  misapprehension  of  the  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith  alone,  but  subsequently  omitted  it  from  his  writings. 

At  a  colloquium  held  in  Worms  by  appointment  of  King  Ferdi- 
nand, in  hope  of  bringing  about  a  union  between  the  Catholics  and 
the  Lutherans,  this  hostility  to  the  necessity  of  good  works  for  sal- 
vation was  again  manifested,  especially  on  the  part  of  the  Saxon 
deputies.  These  more  rigid  Lutherans  insisted  on  it  that,  before 
entering  into  a  conference  with  the  Catholics,  certain  errors,  claimed 
to  be  held  by  a  considerable  portion  of  the  adherents  to  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  should  be  condemned.  One  of  these  errors  thus 
to  be  rejected  is  our  famous  proposition — good  works  necessary  to 
salvation.  To  this  demand  Melanchthon  ultimately,  and  after  much 
hesitation,  agreed,  though  not  soon  enough  to  prevent  our  Weimar 
theologians  from  withdrawing  from  the  conference. 

Besides  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  the  Formula  of  Concord,  one 
of  the  acknowledged  Confessions  of  the  church,  rejects  this  proposi- 
tion as  inconsistent  with  the  words  of  the  apostle  Paul.  Now  in 
this  determined  opposition  to  the  formula  before  us  and  in  its  final 
total  rejection,  there  does  seem  to  be  plain  and  decided  evidence  in 
favor  of  the  charge  that  our  doctrine  does  "  prohibit  good  works," 

The  last  argument,  and  the  one  niainl}'-  relied  upon  to  make  good 
the  accusation  of  favoring  immorality,  is  that  the  logical  and  inevi- 


'J'] 6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

table  tendency  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone  is  to 
produce  neglect  of  the  moral  law.  Owen,  in  his  work  on  justifica- 
tion, speaking  of  several  things  which  are  generally  pleaded  against 
this  doctrine  by  Papists,  Socinians,  etc.,  says  :  "  The  first  and  fountain 
of  all  others  is  that  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  the  imputation 
of  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  renders  our  personal  righteousness 
needless  and  overthrows  all  necessity  of  a  holy  life." 

The  Oiristian  Observer,  an  able  periodical  of  England  and  a 
staunch  and  powerful  defender  of  the  evangelical  faith  aganist  the 
whole  Oxford  school  of  divinity,  remarks,  in  the  volume  for  1836, 
"  that  parties  who  taught  justification  by  faith  and  something  else  ac- 
cused all  who  opposed  it  of  sapping  the  foundation  of  moral  virtue." 

Bossuet  in  his  "Variations  of  Protestantism"  says,  speaking  of 
Melanchthon  :  "  He  saw  himself  always  pressed  with  this  question 
of  the  Catholics  :  '  If  we  are  agreeable  to  God  independently  of  all 
good  works,  and  all  fulfilling  of  the  law,  even  of  that  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  works  in  us,  how  and  whereto  are  good  works  neces- 
sary ?'  Melanchthon  perplexed  himself  in  vain  to  ward  off  this  blow 
and  to  elude  this  dreadful  consequence  :  '  therefore  good  works  ac- 
cording to  you  are  not  necessary.'  " 

Nampon,  already  referred  to,  writes  thus  :  "  When  men  wish  to 
emancipate  themselves  upon  a  system  from  all  laws  human  and 
divine,  they  may  imagine  many  such  systems."  Then  after  having 
mentioned  Pantheism  and  Fourierism  as  two  of  these  systems,  he 
describes  a  third  according  to  which  "  men  may  acknowledge  sin, 
recognize  it  in  themselves,  but  proclaim  that  it, is  necessary,  un- 
avoidable, *  *  *  and  at  the  same  time  perfectly  compatible 
with  the  friendship  of  God,  predestination  to  life,  and  with  salvation. 
Of  these  three  systems  the  last  seems  to  me  to  be  the  worst.  It  is 
degrading,  void  of  consolation,  inconsistent  and  immoral;  neverthe- 
less it  is  that  which  was  eagerly  adopted  by  the  leading  doctors  of 
the  Reformation,  by  the  Lutherans  and  still  more  by  the  Calvinists." 
Here  the  audacious  assertion  is  made  that  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith  is  a  system  devised  for  the  express  purpose  of 
setting  men  free  from  all  laws,  human  and  divine — a  system  framed 
designedly  to  allow  men  to  live  according  to  all  the  lusts  of  their 
evil  hearts  and  yet  at  the  same  time  enable  them  to  cherish  the  hope 
that  they  are  in  favor  with  God  and  shall  inherit  everlasting  life. 

Socinus  charges  Protestant  divines  with  teaching  "  that  God  justi- 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  777 

eth  the  ungodly,  not  only  those  that  arc  so  and  whilst  they  are  so, 
but  although  they  continue  so;  that  they  required  no  inherent 
righteousness  or  holiness  in  any  one,  nor  could  do  so  on  their  own 
principles,  seeing  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ  is  sufficient 
for  them,  although  they  live  in  sin,  are  not  washed  nor  cleansed, 
nor  give  themselves  up  to  the  ways  of  duty  and  obedience  to  God 
whereby  he  may  be  pleased,  and  so  bring  in  libertinism  and  antino- 
mianism  into  the  Church."  These  plainly  expressed  views  of  this 
bold  heretic  are  gathered  by  Owen  from  a  treatise  written  by  So- 
cinus  in  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  the  imputation  of  Christ's  sat- 
isfaction. 

Even  the  Quakers,  as  shown  by  Moehler  in  citations  from  Barclay 
and  other  Friends,  who  have  confounded  justification  and  sanctifica- 
tion  very  much  after  the  manner  of  the  Catholics,  making  the  former 
to  depend  on  a  work  wrought  in  us  and  corresponding  in  degree  to 
the  progress  of  that  internal  work,  whilst  commending  Luther  for 
opposing  the  mere  external  works  of  the  Catholic  Church,  yet  cen- 
sure him  for  going  to  the  opposite  extreme  and  dcnx'ing  the  neces- 
sity of  good  works. 

Goodsir,  a  clerg\'man  of  the  Established  Church  of  Scotland,  de- 
clares :  "  It  is  impossible  to  get  rid  of  the  fact  that  there  is  in  this 
dogma  an  insoluble  puzzle,  paradox,  or  contradiction,  and  that  one 
of  its  contradictory  propositions  is  armed  in  a  logical  sense  with  an 
irrestible  antiomian  force."  The  dogma  he  is  speaking  of  is  that  of 
justification  by  faith  alone. 

The  same  writer  says:  "Absolutely  ever\^  reason  and  motive 
proving  the  necessity  for  entering  on  a  new  life  and  living  in  obedi- 
ence to  the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  is  flatly  contradicted  by  the 
explicit  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  or  salvation  set 
forth  authoritatively  in  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith." 

Concerning  our  own  symbol  he  uses  the  following  language:  "It 
came  clearly  into  view  in  my  examination  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession that  a  most  disastrous  collision  between  justification  or 
salvation  and  the  divine  commands  enjoining  righteousness  and 
holiness,  is  the  direct  and  inevitable  result  of  making  the  great 
gospel  benefit  a  purely  external  or  imputative,  as  well  as  a  purely 
gratuitous  thing.  For,  whereas  the  divine  commands,  promulgated 
by  the  gospel,  declare  that  repentance,  regeneration,  righteousness 
and  holiness  are  necessary  in  order  to  the  reaching  and  enjoying  of 


778  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

eternal  life;  this  is  flatly  contradicted  by  the  declaration  that  these 
graces  are  neither  elements  of  justification  or  salvation,  for  it  is  ex- 
ternal or  imputative;  nor  conditions  of  justification  or  salvation,  for 
it  is  as  well  gratuitous,  as  the  undoubted  ground  or  title  for  the  at- 
tainment and  enjoyment  of  eternal  life."  The  objection  of  this 
writer  to  the  Confessions  mentioned,  is,  in  short,  the  following: 
from  the  idea  of  justification,  that  of  sanctification  is  absolutely  ex- 
cluded, and  then  whatever  there  is  left  in  it  is  bestowed  gratuitously, 
or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  unconditionally,  or  at  the  most  upon 
condition  of  a  mere  instrumental  faith  from  which,  in  like  manner, 
every  moral  quality  has  been  carefully  eliminated.  And  yet  the 
effect  of  such  a  justification  thus  bestowed  is  nothing  less  than  for- 
giveness of  sin  and  a  title  to  everlasting  life,  and  all  accomplished 
without  the  need  of  any  sanctifying  element  in  the  justification  be- 
stowed, or  any  moral  virtue  in  the  faith  through  which  alone  it  is 
received.  Verily,  this  does  look  as  though  at  last  we  had  found  a 
way  of  salvation  without  being  obliged  to  give  up  sin — a  way  of 
getting  into  the  "kingdom  of  heaven  without  any  change  in  our 
moral  character. 

Bishop  Jebb  and  Alexander  Knox,  a  layman  of  the  Anglican 
Church,  regard  justification  by  faith  as  a  mere  notion  or  cold  ab- 
straction, and  therefore  a  nonentity.  They  then  infer  that  as  a 
notion  it  can  have  no  effect  upon  the  heart,  no  moral  influence  on 
the  mind  and  conduct.  To  remedy  this  defect  they  propose  to 
adopt  the  Romish  expedient  of  confounding  justification  with  sanc- 
tification. Such  is  substantially  the  account  of  the  Christian  Ob- 
server of  (the  views  of)  these  two  friends  in  their  correspondence 
with  each  other.  This  is,  in  general,  also  the  view  of  the  Tractar- 
ians,  as  Bishop  Mcllvain  has  demonstrated  in  his  excellent  work  on 
Righteousness  by  Faith,  in  which  he  proves  that  the  Oxford  di- 
vinity was  very  largely  the  development  of  rudimental  principles  set 
forth  in  Knox's  "  Remains." 

Prof  Ritschl,  of  the  University  of  Gottingen,  in  his  able  work  on 
justification  and  reconciliation,  regards  the  attempt  of  Protestant 
writers  to  show  that  the  faith  which  justifies  involves  also  the  ability 
and  the  inclination  to  well  doing,  as  a  failure,  thus  leaving  a  missing 
link  between  justification  and  obedience.  Of  Zwingii's  definition 
that  saving  faith  is  at  the  same  time  the  disposition  to  perform  good 
works,   he   says:    "The   combination   is   merely   asserted,  but   not 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAH  H    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  779 

vindicated."     Prof.  Ritschl,  it  must  be  remembered,  is  not  a  Catholic 
theologian. 

Dr.  Godet,  Professor  ofTheoloi^y  in  Neuchatel,  and  the  author  of 
many  most  thoughtful  and  helpful  books,  also  a  Protestant,  expresses 
himself  as  follows  on  the  subject  under  consideration:  "Protestant- 
ism, we  must  confess,  has  always  shown  itself  weak  and  embarrassed 
when  called  upon  to  point  out  precisely  the  organic  connection  be- 
tween these  two  elements  of  salvation — forgiveness  and  holiness. 
Theologians  of  this  way  of  thinking  have  generally  looked  for  this 
connection  in  the  feeling  of  gratitude,  or  else  have  contented  them- 
selves with  simply  adding  on  the  exposition  of  the  law  to  that  of 
grace,  without  seeking  to  discover  the  inner  relation  which  connects 
the  latter  with  faith  and  the  former  with  obedience."  The  juxtapo- 
sition he  judges  insufficient,  and  the  feeling  of  gratitude  does  not 
constitute  a  proper  foundation  for  the  duty  of  Christian  sanctifi- 
cation. 

Beard,  in  the  Hibbard  Lectures  for  1883,  on  the  "  Reformation  in 
its  relation  to  Modern  Thought  and  Knowledge,"  declares  that  anti- 
nomianism  follows  logically  from  a  hard  and  external  interpretation 
of  justification  by  faith. 

Swedenborg,  himself  the  son  of  a  Lutheran  bishop  of  Sweden, 
gives  it  as  his  decided  conviction  that  the  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith  is  subversive  of  morality  and  extremely  pernicious  to  all  prac- 
tical Christianity,  and,  accordingly,  in  his  "True  Christian  Religion  ' 
he  opposes  it  with  all  his  power,  in  season  and  out  of  season.  He 
assures  us,  on  the  authority  of  an  angel,  that  those  who  embrace 
the  doctrine  here  are  doomed  to  take  up  their  abode  hereafter  in  a 
desert  in  which  there  is  no  grass,  whilst  those  who  rely  on  both 
faith  and  charity  are  permitted  to  dwell  with  the  angels.  And  he 
further  informs  us  that  as  the  result  of  his  own  persistent  efforts 
with  him,  Luther  himself  has  become  convinced  that  his  favorite 
doctrine  had  been  taken,  not  from  the  word  of  God,  but  from  his 
own  intelligence,  that  he  frequently  laughs  at  his  former  dogmas  as 
diametrically  opposed  to  the  Bible,  and,  admitting  that  he  seized 
upon  the  idea  of  faith  to  break  away  from  the  Catholics,  wonders 
however  how  one  crazy  man  could  make  so  many  others  crazy,  so 
that  they  could  not  see  that  the  Scriptures  were  against  his  doctrine. 

Of  course,  if  this  testimony  is  to  be  admitted  against  us,  if  it  must 
be   conceded   that  our   heroic   leader,   who   while  on   earth   feared 


780  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

neitlier  devils  nor  flames,  has  struck  the  flag,  and  if  residence  in  a 
monotonous,  grassless  plain  is  the  just  award  of  heaven  to  such  as 
hold  this  doctrine, -then  it  is  all  up  with  justification  by  faith  alone. 
But  when  we  remember  that  this  same  witness  also  testified  that  the 
Christian  Church  had  come  to  an  end  on  the  19th  of  June,  1770, 
and  that  information  to  that  effect  had  been  sent  out  by  Christ  him- 
self to  the  whole  spiritual  world,  and  that  a  new  church  should  be 
raised  up  among  the  Gentiles,  there  is  some  hope  that  his  testimony 
against  Lutherans  may  be  ruled  out. 

A  stronger  argument,  however,  against  the  moral  effects  of  our 
doctrine  than  that  brought  from  the  regions  visited  by  this  wonder- 
ful dreamer,  is  involved  in  the  well  established  fact  that  many  of  the 
staunchest  and  most  devoted  friends  of  justification  felt  and  acted  on 
the  conviction  that  there  ought  to  be  some  modification  in  the  form 
of  its  expression.  Thus,  for  example,  Osiander  proposed  to  include 
sanctification  as  an  element  in  justification.  Melanchthon,  Major, 
Menius  and  others,  wished  to  guard  the  doctrine  as  ordinarily  stated, 
by  the  declaration  that  good  works,  whilst  not  necessary  to  justifi- 
cation, were  necessary  to  salvation.  Others,  while  adhering  to  the 
approved  mode  of  expression,  sought  to  prevent  antinoniian  conse- 
quences by  extending  the  meaning  of  faith  so  as  to  make  it  really 
equivalent  to  faith  and  works.  Such  was  the  course  advocated  by 
Lauterwald.  of  Upper  Austria,  and  Bishop  Bull,  of  England.  The 
same  desire  for  a  qualified  statement  of  this  important  doctrine  man- 
ifested itself  among  English  Protestants.  J.  T.  Goodsir,  of  the 
National  Church  of  Scotland  formerly,  makes  the  declaration  that 
for  a  period  of  a  hundred  and  twenty-five  years,  to  the  adoption 
of  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  in  1646,  '*  controversies  were 
caused  in  the  Protestant  world  by  the  collision  between  an  external 
and  gratuitous  justification  and  the  moral  requirements  of  revealed 
religion,  and  that  it  was  urged  in  these  controversies  that  righteous- 
ness and  holiness  were  not  merely  necessary,  but  necessary  either  as 
elements  or  conditions  of  justification,  and  consequently  necessary 
to  the  enjoyment  of  eternal  life." 

But  even  after  the  settlement  of  the  controversy  in  favor  of  an 
unconditional  justification  by  the  adoption  of  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession, and  especially  its  eleventh  chapter,  the  desire  for  a  change 
or  qualification  continued  to  manifest  itself,  and  in  about  seventy- 
five  vears  afterward  was  influential  enough  in  the  Assemblies  of  the 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  /Si 

Church  of  Scotland  of  1720  and  1722,  to  pass  an  act  dechiring 
"good  works  to  be  necessary  to  everlasting  salvation;"  thus  mater- 
ially modifying  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone,  as  well  as 
diminishing  its  influence  indefinitely.  Now,  as  already  remarked, 
this  persistent  agitation  in  favor  of  some  more  guarded  statement 
seems  plainly  to  denote  that  in  the  judgment  of  many  of  its  most 
faithful  friends  the  doctrine  of  justification  in  its  present  form  was 
easily  susceptible  of  such  interpretation  as  to  lend  encouragement  to 
evil  doers  to  continue  in  their  sinful  course. 

Having  now  set  forth  the  nature  of  the  charge  brought  against  us, 
with  sufficient  minuteness  and  fullness  to  enable  us  to  understand 
definitely  what  the  accusation  involves  and  also  to  appreciate  the 
force  thereof,  let  us  next  proceed  to  inquire  what  defence  may  be 
set  up  against  the  indictment  preferred. 

The  Defence. 

Our  Article  unhesitatingly  declares  the  charge  to  be  false,  and 
promptly  and  energetically  goes  on  to  justify  itself  for  pleading  not 
guilty. 

The  writings  of  the  accused  are  summoned  to  prove  that  useful 
instruction  has  been  imparted  in  regard  to  the  duties  of  men  in  the 
various  relations  of  life  ;  and  that  this  instruction  has  even  had  the 
happy  effect  of  bringing  about  a  decided  improvement  in  the  preach- 
ing of  the  adversaries,  causing  them  to  say  less  about  the  childish 
and  unprofitable  things  before  discussed,  and  more  about  faith. 

Next  there  follows  a  re-statement  of  the  doctrine  assailed,  and  a 
confirmation  of  the  same  from  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers. 

Then  there  is  given  a  full  definition  of  the  faith  to  which  justifica- 
tion is  ascribed.  This  is  felt  to  be  a  vital  point  in  the  defence.  For 
if  faith  be  merely  a  belief  that  what  is  revealed  in  the  Scriptures  is 
true,  then  it  would  indeed  become  a  most  difficult  thing  to  maintain 
that  the  faith  which  justifies  does  also  sanctify.  But  faith  has  an 
element  beyond  belief,  viz.,  "  trust  which  comforts  and  lifts  up  dis- 
quieted minds." 

After  this  comes  an  explanation  as  to  the  manner  in  which  faith 
produces  good  works.  By  faith  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received  ;  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  the  heart  is  renewed  and  new  affections  are  begotten, 
the  fruit  of  all  which  is  the  very  thing  we  are  accused  of  prohibiting 
— viz.,  good  works. 


782  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  line  of  defence  thus  adopted  by  our  Confessors  is  in  every 
respect  admirable,  having  unquestionably  been  based  upon  and  sug- 
gested by  an  experimental  knowledge  of  the  workings  of  faith  as 
observed  in  their  own  hearts  and  lives.  We  shall  use  the  long -tried 
weapons  laid  up  in  this  arsenal  of  truth  in  attempting  to  resist  the 
attack  upon  the  faith  delivered  to  us  by  these  faithful  soldiers  of  the 
cross. 

The  portion  of  our  Article  which  consists  in  a  re-statement  and 
confirmation  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  need  not  be  dwelt  upon 
in  this  discourse,  it  being  sufificient  to  refer  the  reader  to  the  able 
and  satisfactory  discussion  thereof  in  the  Holman  Lecture  on  the 
Fourth  Article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  published  in  the  October 
number  of  the  Evangelical  Quarterly  Review  for  1869.  The  design 
and  advantage  of  its  introduction  into  this  Article  must  not,  however, 
by  any  means  be  passed  by  without  due  consideration  ;  for  it  is  in- 
serted here  as  part  of  the  answer  to  the  charge  stated  at  the  begin- 
ning, and  involves  a  most  important  argument  in  our  favor.  They 
mean  to  say,  we  can  show  that  our  doctrine  concerning  faith  is 
taught  in  the  Scriptures,  and  being  a  Scripture  truth  it  cannot  pos- 
sibly give  encouragement  to  evil  doing  nor  prove  a  hindrance  to 
works  of  righteousness  and  holiness.  Having  established  it  as  a 
doctrine  from  God,  we  can  say  it  is  holy,  just  and  good  ;  and  if  in  any 
case  it  is  claimed  that  that  which  is  good  was  made  death  to  any 
one,  we  insist  upon  it  that  it  was  not  the  doctwne  concerning  faith 
that  deceived  and  slew  him,  but  his  own  sins  wrought  death  in  him 
by  that  which  itself  is  good.  Whatever  is  done,  therefore,  to  show 
that  this  doctrine  as  held  and  expounded  by  our  Church  is  derived 
from  the  Scriptures,  is  so  much  done  to  vindicate  it  and  us  from  the 
charge  of  forbidding  good  works.  For  if  the  fact  that  justification 
hinders  good  works  is  proof  that  justification  is  not  true,  then  also 
the  fact  that  the  doctrine  is  true  becomes  proof  that  it  is  not  and 
cannot  be  detrimental  to  the  cause  of  morality. 

The  other  arguments  contained  in  our  Article  will  all  be  made  use 
of  at  the  proper  time,  in  our  answer  to  the  charge  to  which  our  Con- 
fessors refused  to  plead  guilty. 

Believing  that  all  the  evidence  furnished  by  our  adversaries  to 
substantiate  the  charge  they  have  made,  is  contained  in  the  three 
propositions  mentioned  near  the  beginning  of  this  lecture,  we  shall 
proceed  to  consider  these  and  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  before 
enumerated  : 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  783 

I.  The  first  of  these  is  an  arj^ument  from  the  character  of  the  pro- 
fessors of  any  particular  doctrine  to  the  character  of  the  doctrine 
itself,  or  from  the  character  of  the  effect  to  that  of  the  cause.  The 
doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone,  it  is  maintained,  must  be 
immoral  and  false,  because  the  manners  and  lives  of  those  who  have 
embraced  it  are  corrupt  and  ungodly. 

In  replying  to  this,  let  us  first  hear  the  answer  Bishop  Davenant 
gives  to  this  objection  as  made  by  Cardinal  Bellarmine:  "What 
frivolous  arguing  !  Many  Lutherans  live  wickedly,  therefore  Luther 
denied  the  necessity  of  good  works.  As  if  many  Papists,  many 
cardinals,  ye?t  Roman  Pontiffs,  did  not  live  very  wickedly,  although 
the  necessity  of  good  works  is  by  no  means  denied  in  the  Roman 
Church.  *  *  *  And  lastly,  what  outstrips  all  the  folly  is  that  a 
Romanist  should  infer  error  of  doctrine  from  corrupt  manners ;  a 
process  of  reasoning  by  which  Rome  herself,  the  chief  seat  of  all 
wickedness  (as  all  the  world  can  testify)  must  be  concluded  to  be 
herself  the  very  sink  of  all  errors."  It  is  certainly  not  going  beyond 
the  truth  to  say  with  Owen  that  "  those  who  at  present  oppose  this 
doctrine  do  not  in  holiness  or  righteousness,  in  the  exercise  of  faith, 
love,  zeal,  self  denial  and  all  other  Christian  graces,  surpass  those 
who  adhere  to  it;"  or  with  Bishop  O'Brien  that  "this  doctrine  has 
no  reason  to  fear  the  result  of  a  comparison  of  what  those  who  hold 
it  have  been  enabled  to  do  and  to  suffer  in  the  cause  of  Christ,  with 
any  sacrifices  or  any  labors  which  have  been  the  fruits  of  any  other 
view  of  the  gospel." 

And  that  a  very  considerable  portion  of  Catholics  are  far  from 
being  worthy  to  have  their  names  appear  in  the  calendar  of  saints, 
is  evident  from  admissions  by  Catholic  writers  themselves.  Dr. 
Milner,  for  example,  an  able  controversialist  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
writes  as  follows  in  his  "  End  of  Controversy  :"  "  I,  as  well  as  Baro- 
nius,  Bellarmine,  and  other  Catholic  writers,  have  unequivocally 
adnn'tted  that  some  few  of  our  pontiffs  have  disgraced  themselves  by 
their  crimes  and  given  just  cause  of  scandal  to  Christendom.  I 
acknowledge  with  the  same  unreservedness  that  the  lives  of  very 
many  Catholics  in  this  and  in  other  parts  of  the  Church  are  a  dis- 
grace to  that  Holy  Catholic  Church  which  they  profess  to  believe 
in — unhappy  members  of  the  true  religion  by  whom  the  name  of 
God  is  blasphemed  among  the  nations." 

Now  from  this  frank  acknowledgment  it  appears  that  the  lives  of 


784  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

those  who  adhere  to  the  supposed  true  faith  are,  to  say  the  least,  no 
better  than  those  of  the  members  of  the  Protestant  Church.  If, 
therefore,  the  Lutheran  view  of  justification  is  false  and  immoral 
because  the  lives  of  many  of  its  adherents  are  sinful,  then  it  follows 
likewise  that  the  Catholic  view  is  false  and  immoral,  for  the  lives  of 
its  adherents  are  corrupt  likewise.  Accordingly,  there  is  neither 
justification  by  faith  without  works,  nor  justification  by  faith  with 
works.  This  of  course  is  an  absurdity,  and  so  is  the  argument  that 
leads  to  it. 

But  besides  its  being  absurd,  necessitating  a  conclusion  known  to 
be  false,  the  argument  is  also  impracticable  and  therefore  without 
value.  In  the  case  of  the  persons  whose  immoral  lives  are  to  prove 
the  immoral  effects  of  justification,  it  must  certainly  be  shown  that 
they  had  indeed  actually  embraced  the  doctrine  taught  by  Luther  ; 
not  merely  that  they  had  in  swarms  renounced  the  Catholic  faith, 
and  professed  the  Lutheran,  but  that  they  had,  from  the  heart  and 
with  a  correct  understanding,  adopted  the  same.  The  establishment 
of  this  single  fact  in  the  case  before  us  is  by  no  means  a  simple 
matter  when  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  period  referred  to  are 
taken  into  consideration  ;  and  yet  the  demand  that  the  fact  be  estab- 
lished is  just  as  reasonable  as  the  demand  that  before  the  death  of 
any  individual  be  charged  to  the  mal-practice  of  a  certain  physician, 
it  should  be  shown  that  the  deceased  had  actually  been  under  his 
treatment  and  had  made  use  of  his  prescriptions. 

Then  again,  after  having  shown  the  co-existence  of  belief  in  Lu- 
ther's theory  of  salvation  and  general  corruption  of  manners  in 
the  same  subjects,  it  ought  to  be  made  to  appear  that  the  corruption 
was  really  produced  by  their  belief,  and  not  by  any  one  of  the  many 
other  causes  that  give  rise  to  it.  And  when  it  is  remembered  that 
the  neglect  of  good  works  complained  of  is  found  where  no  theory 
whatever  as  to  the  way  of  salvation  has  been  adopted,  yea,  even 
where  the  Catholic  view  itself  is  held,  it  can  readily  be  seen  that  it  is 
a  matter  of  extreme  difficulty  by  any  mere  process  of  reasoning  to 
show  to  a  certainty  that  the  persons  referred  to  by  Bellarmine  would 
have  lived  better  lives  had  they  not  come  under  the  influence  of 
Luther's  doctrine  concerning  justification.  On  account  of  the  diffi- 
culties involved  in  this  method  of  argument  by  deduction,  it  becomes 
simply  impracticable  and  therefore  useless.  If  the  connection  be- 
tween belief  in  justification  as  taught  by  the  Lutheran  Church  and 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  785 

disregard  for  the  requirements  of  the  moral  law  can  be  established 
at  all,  it  must  be  done  in  some  other  way  than  the  one  now  under 
consideration.  The  only  effectual  method,  in  fact,  of  arguing  from 
the  conduct  of  the  adherents  to  a  certain  faith  against  the  faith  itself, 
is  by  the  process  of  induction.  Cases  must  be  adduced  of  persons 
or  communities  that  before  adopting  said  faith  were  living  in  obedi- 
ence to  the  will  of  God  but  afterwards  manifested  a  total  disregard 
of  the  same. 

Now  this  very  thing  is  attempted  to  be  done  in  the  work  by  Dr. 
Dollinger  on  the  "Reformation  as  to  its  Interior  Development  and 
Effects,"  as  may  be  seen  in  the  extracts  taken  from  it  by  the  Dublin 
Review  for  Sept.,  1848,  and  inserted  in  Spalding's  History  of  the 
Reformation.  By  means  of  exclusively  Protestant  testimony,  it  is 
claimed  that  the  people  of  Germany  in  general,  who,  under  Catholic 
influence,  had  been  virtuous  and  pious,  became  licentious  and  un- 
godly to  an  unusual  degree  upon  adopting  the  Protestant  faith. 
Luther  declares  that  "  nowadays  men  are  more  corrupt,  covetous, 
hard-hearted,  licentious  and  wicked  than  under  the  papacy.  *  *  * 
Our  evangelicals  are  sevenfold  more  wicked  than  before."  Melanch- 
thon  says,  that  never  in  the  days  of  our  fathers  had  there  existed 
such  gluttony  as  now.  Althamer  writes:  "Nobody  cares  to  in- 
struct his  child,  his  servant,  his  maid,  or  any  of  his  dependents,  in 
the  word  of  God  or  his  fear.  And  thus  our  young  generation  is  the 
worst  that  ever  existed."  It  is  further  claimed  that  the  testimonies 
gathered  from  Protestant  documents  describe  the  social  condition, 
not  only  of  a  portion  of  Germany  under  the  Reformation,  but  of  the 
country  in  general,  specially  naming  the  following:  Saxony,  Hesse, 
Nassau,  Brandenburg,  Strasburg,  Nurenburg,  Stralsund,  Thorn, 
Mecklenburg,  Westphalia,  Pomerania,  Friesland,  Denmark  and 
Sweden. 

It  is  further  asserted  that  "  districts  in  which  crimes  were  un- 
known were  scarcel\'  initiated  in  the  principles  of  the  Reformation 
till  they  became  corrupted  to  the  heart's  core."  Ditmarsen  in  Hol- 
stein  is  cited  as  a  remarkable  instance. 

The  universities  are  declared  to  have  become  more  corrupt  after 
the  Reformation  than  before,  being  pronounced  by  Protestants 
themselves  "asylums  of  dishonesty  and  vice,"  and  "dens  of  immor- 
ality, to  which  parents  feared  to  send  their  children."  And  from 
Wolfgang  Menzcl,  Spalding  shows  that  the  imperial  court  of  Vienna 


786  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

afforded,  by  its  dignity  and  morality,  a  bright  contrast  to  the  major- 
ity of  Protestant  courts. 

Now  here  we  are  furnished  with  a  fearful  array  of  evidence, 
gathered  exclusively  from  Protestant  sources,  which  seems  abun- 
dantly sufficient  to  prove  the  immoral  effects  of  the  Reformation  of 
the  i6th  century.  Admitting,  as  I  suppose  we  must,  that  the  state 
of  things  in  Germany  is  correctly  represented  in  this  testimony,  do 
the  facts  furnished  necessitate  the  conclusion  our  opponents  draw 
therefrom  in  regard  to  the  tendency  of  the  Protestant  faith  ?  We 
maintain  they  do  not,  and  for  the  following  reasons: 

The  facts  relied  on  to  verify  their  theory  are  taken  from  too  narrow 
a  strip  of  the  entire  field  of  investigation  to  justify  a  conclusion  as  to 
the  character  of  the  whole.  True,  this  at  first  glance  does  not  seem 
to  be  the  case,  inasmuch  as  the  testimony  is  taken  from  common 
life,  from  life  in  the  universities  and  at  the  courts  of  the  nobles  and 
of  the  reigning  princes;  not  from  one  section  of  Germany  merely, 
but  from  no  less  than  fourteen  different  countries  which  are  specifi- 
cally enumerated;  not  from  one  institution  of  learning  only,  but 
from  all ;  not  from  one  Protestant  court,  but  from  the  majority  of 
them.  This  certainly  does  look  as  though  the  experiments  were 
sufificiently  varied  and  general  to  justify  the  conclusion  that  what 
was  true  in  so  many  cases,  must  be  true  in  all,  or  at  all  events  in  a 
majority  of  cases,  and  reveal  the  existence  of  a  law  to  the  effect 
that  the  adoption  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  is  followed 
by  the  neglect  of  God's  commandments. 

Nevertheless,  on  closer  examination  it  will  be  found  that,  in  .spite 
of  the  long  list  of  particulars,  the  experiment  is  really  but  one  made 
of  one  people,  one  country,  one  period,  and  one  general  condition  of 
things.  The  people  examined,  whether  taken  from  the  court,  the 
university,  the  field  or  the  shop,  from  German  or  Scandinavian 
lands,  all  belong  to  one  common  family — the  Gothic. 

The  time  in  which  the  experiment  is  made  is  the  remarkable 
period  of  transition  from  the  bondage  of  the  papacy  to  the  freedom  of 
the  gospel.  This  one  circumstance,  that  the  numerous  facts  adduced 
are  supplied  by  one  people,  subject  to  one  common  influence,  goes 
very  far  toward  overthrowing  the  whole  argument  based  upon  the 
evidence  so  laboriously  collected  by  Dr.  DoUinger  in  his  History  of 
the  Reformation. 

Then  again  the  testimony  of  the  facts  is  not  uniformly  in  favor  of 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  787 

the  theory  to  be  proved,  even  in  the  one  period  and  country  from 
wliich  they  were  obtained,  for  it  is  a  truth  beyond  question  that 
among  those  who  professed  the  new  faith  there  were  found  many 
most  godly  men  and  women  whose  holy  and  devoted  lives  reflected 
great  credit  on  the  religion  they  had  embraced.  This  is  a  second 
circumstance  calculated  to  vitiate  the  argument  we  are  examining. 

And  when  the  experiment  is  made,  as  it  must  be  to  have  any 
value,  in  other  nations  and  in  other  periods,  it  will  be  found  that 
there  are  many  instances  in  which  countries  adopting  the  Protestant 
faith  were  not  only  improved  thereby,  but  attained  to  a  moral  and 
religious  condition  not  easily  paralleled  in  the  best  Roman  Catholic 
country  in  the  world.  This,  with  the  other  considerations  presented, 
is  enough  completely  to  overthrow  the  argument  by  induction  from 
experiments  made  "  in  the  circle  of  the  Lutheran  Confessions,"  and 
to  prove  beyond  a  doubt  that  whatever  the  facts  may  signify,  they 
do  not  serve  to  establish  it  as  a  general  truth,  that  the  acceptance  of 
the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone  results  in  neglect  of  the 
law  of  God.  They  really,  formidable  as  they  appear  from  their 
number  and  character,  prove  nothing  more  than  that  the  introduction 
of  the  Reformation  into  the  various  countries  of  Germany  was  ac- 
companied by  an  apparent  deterioration  of  the  public  morals,  and 
this  result  can  be  most  satisfactorily  accounted  for  by  the  peculiar 
circumstances  under  which  the  Reformation  was  brought  about, 
without  any  admissions  derogatory  to  the  moral  tendency  of  the 
glorious  doctrine  which  our  church  has  the  honor  to  have  given 
back  again  to  the  world. 

The  circumstances  we  refer  to  as  accounting  for  the  facts  adduced 
by  Dr.  Dollinger  are  the  following : 

The  long- forgotten  truth  which  Luther  was  raised  up  to  set  forth 
and  defend  is  one  of  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  which  the  nat- 
ural man  cannot  receive,  because  spiritual  discernment  is  required  ', 
a  doctrine  to  the  reception  of  which  a  genuine  inner  religious  ex- 
perience is  essential. 

Besides,  it  had  to  be  set  forth  in  terms  peculiarly  liable  to  be  mis- 
understood. 

Mr.  Beard,  in  the  Hibbert  Lectures  for  1883,  well  says:  "All  the 
words  to  which  faith  answers  have  in  different  proportions  an  intel- 
lectual and  a  moral  side.  On  one  side  they  rise  into  '  trust,'  and 
imply  a  personal  affection  ;  on  the  the  other  they  sink  into  '  belief,' 


788  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

and  may  mean  no  more  than  an  intellectual  assent.  But  unhappily 
'  glaube  '  alone  covers  the  whole  ground.  It  is  faith  and  belief  too." 
On  this  account  justification  by  faith  may  very  readily  be  taken  to 
mean  no  more  than  justification  by  belief,  which,  as  any  one  can 
perceive,  is  a  very  different  thing  from  what  Luther  maintained. 

Again,  many  of  the  teachers  of  this  doctrine  were  not  competent 
to  exhibit  it  with  the  clearness  and  correctness  necessary  to  a  proper 
apprehension  of  it  on  the  part  of  the  hearers.  "  Most  of  the  preach- 
ers," writes  Bucer,  "  imagine  that  if  they  inveigh  stoutly  against  the 
anti-Christians  (the  Papists)  and  chatter  away  on  a  few  unimportant 
fruitless  questions,  and  then  assail  their  brethren  also,  they  have 
discharged  their  duty  admirably."  Seckendorf  assures  us  that  some 
preached  of  nothing  but  forgiveness  and  faith,  neglecting  the  doc- 
trine concerning  sanctification  and  good  works,  and  thus  weakened 
the  desire  of  holiness.  Ledderhose,  in  his  life  of  Melanchthon,  in- 
forms us  that  Melanchthon  was  commissioned  to  prepare  a  manual 
of  instructions  for  the  ministers  in  the  Electorate  of  Saxony.  The 
very  fact  of  such  a  work  being  ordered,  as  well  as  the  instructions 
given  in  the  same,  show  clearly  that  the  teachers  themselves  needed 
to  be  taught.  This  is  a  second  circumstance  that  must  be  consid- 
ered in  accounting  for  the  exceptional  moral  effects  attending  the 
first  introduction  of  the  Reformation. 

And  lastly,  this  highly  spiritual  doctrine,  to  a  great  extent  en- 
trusted as  a  matter  of  necessity  to  men  poorly  fitted  to  teach  it,  was 
to  be  lodged  in  the  understandings  and  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
lives  of  a  people  still  less  prepared  to  receive  it.  Luther  complained 
of  the  condition  of  things  in  Saxony:  "  Help,  dear  Lord,  what  fre- 
quent distress  have  I  seen,  because  the  common  people,  particularly 
in  villages,  know  nothing  at  all  of  Christian  doctrine,  and  it  is  but 
too  true  that  many  ministers  are  unskillful  and  unfit  to  teach.  And 
yet  all  are  called  Christians,  are  baptized,  and  enjoy  the  holy  sacra- 
ments, and  do  not  even  know  the  Lord's  Prayer,  or  the  Creed,  or 
the  Ten  Commandments,  and  live  on  like  the  brutes." 

Melanchthon  often  went  out  and  wept,  as  he  writes  himself: 
"  What  can  be  offered  in  justification,  that  these  poor  people  have 
hitherto  been  left  in  such  great  ignorance  and  stupidity?  My  heart 
bleeds  when  I  regard  this  miser}'.  Often  when  we  have  completed 
the  visitation  of  a  place  I  go  to  one  side  and  pour  forth  my  distress 
in  tears.     And  who  would  not  mourn  to  see  the  faculties  of  man  so 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  7S9 

utterly  neglected,  and  that  his  soul,  which  is  able  to  learn  and  grasp 
so  much,  does  not  even  know  anything  of  its  Creator  and  Lord." 
Seckendorf,  as  quoted  by  Hare,  declares  "  that  through  the  sloth  or 
unfaithfulness  of  their  priests  before  Luther  began  to  preach,  the 
great  body  of  the  common  people  were  kept  in  ignorance  of  religion 
and  merely  urged  to  a  servile  observance  of  ceremonies."  That 
most  of  them  were  so  rude  "  as  not  even  to  recognize  enormous  sins 
to  be  such,  nor  have  any  thought  of  avoiding  them,  being  accustomed 
to  rely  upon  the  outward  expiations  hitherto  practiced,  by  means  of 
confession  and  ecclesiastical  satisfactions." 

Now  take  all  together:  a  doctrine  requiring  a  true  knowledge  of 
self  and  of  the  Saviour  of  mankind,  is  to  be  taught  by  men  in  many 
cases  ill-fitted  for  the  work,  to  a  people  such  as  described  by  the 
testimony  above  given,  and  what  conception  is  it  likely  that  they 
would  form  in  the  main  of  the  grand  truth  whereby  the  world  was 
to  be  made  glad  ?  Uninformed  and  undisciplined  in  mind,  ignorant 
of  the  most  essential  parts  of  God's  word,  morally  so  abased  as 
almost  to  have  lost  the  very  power  of  discriminating  between  right 
and  wrong  in  the  clearest  instances,  accustomed  to  a  method  of  for- 
giveness after  sinning  which  instead  of  regarding  amendment  of  life 
as  at  all  essential  made  light  of  it  and  attached  all  importance  to 
mere  outward  observances,  such  as  confessions,  repeating  Pater 
No.sters,  fastings,  bodily  mortifications  and  other  mere  external 
ceremonies,  is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that  people  in  such  a  case  would 
by  a  free  justification  understand  their  former  doctrine  of  penance  to 
be  meant  with  the  penance  left  out ;  or  in  other  words,  that  they 
would  conceive  Luther's  doctrine  to  denote  that  they  could  sin  as 
before  and  be  spared  the  trouble  besides  of  making  confession  to  a 
priest  and  submitting  to  the  penalties  imposed  by  him?  The  practi- 
cal effect  of  such  a  view  by  such  a  people  would  in  all  likelihood  be 
a  state  of  things  very  much  like  that  depicted  by  Dr.  Bollinger's 
plain-spoken  and  faithful  witnesses.  Not  to  the  legitimate  effect  of 
the  soul-comforting  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  in  Christ,  but  to 
the  degraded  intellectual  and  moral  condition  of  the  people  to  whom 
it  was  proclaimed,  must  the  results  complained  of  be  attributed — a 
condition  of  things  that  Luther  and  the  Reformation  inherited,  but 
did  not  create. 

We  have  thus   far  proceeded  on  the  supposition  that  the  fact  as- 
serted by  our  opponents  in   respect  to  the  superior  moral  condition 
51 


790  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

of  the  German  people  before  the  Reformation  was  correct — a  sup- 
position absolutely  essential  to  their  argument — and  yet  have  been 
able,  as  we  think,  to  make  it  appear  that,  granting  what  they  assert, 
their  testimon)'  does  not  prove  our  doctrine  guilty  of  prohibiting 
good  works.  But  we  honestly  believe  that  too  much  was  admitted: 
that  notwithstanding  appearances,  the  people  in  reality  were  just  as 
corrupt  before  the  Reformation  as  after  it.  Like  an  unruly  son  held 
in  check  by  the  strong  hand  of  a  determined  father,  the  masses  were 
restrained  in  a  measure  from  overt  acts  of  sin  by  penances,  purgatory, 
and  hell ;  but  as  soon  as  the  fear  of  these  things  was  taken  away 
they  acted  out  the  evil  nature  in  them  without  let  or  hindrance,  just 
as  the  morally  uncultured  boy  referred  to  gives  free  reins  to  his  un- 
tamed passions  the  moment  he  leaves  the  parental  home  for  college. 
In  both  cases  there  seems  to  be  a  change  for  the  worse,  but  the 
change  is  only  apparent;  they  were  not  saints  before  nor  afterwards. 
In  the  case  of  Saxony  the  testimony  we  have  produced  before  shows 
that  its  moral  condition  was  as  low  as  it  could  well  be  conceived  to 
be.  In  respect  to  Ditmarsen,  a  district  in  Holstein,  it  is  claimed 
that  it  was  remarkably  free'from  certain  crimes  before  the  Catholic 
religion  was  abolished  in  1532,  but  that  in  less  than  ten  years  after, 
"  public  crimes  prevailed  so  universally  that  neither  preaching, 
teaching,  instruction,  menaces,  nor  the  terror  of  God's  wrath  and 
his  righteous  judgment,  was  of  any  avail."  Now  will  any  man  in 
his  senses  believe  that  if  these  people  had  been  as  harmless  and 
pious  as  represented  they  would  so  soon  thereafter  have  become  so 
fearfully  corrupt?  Verily,  it  requires  a  total  renunciation  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  perseverance  of  the  saints  to  accept  a  claim  like  this. 
And  what  we  have  good  reason  to  believe  as  to  Saxony  and  the 
district  in  Holstein  specially  singled  out,  is,  no  doubt,  true  also  in 
regard  to  the  other  countries  of  Germany  and  Scandinavia — they 
were  fully  as  bad  in  reality  before  their  conversion  to  Protestantism 
as  afterwards;  and  we  feel  sure  that  if  Catholic  writers  had  been  as 
frank  as  ours  were  in  describing  the  moral  condition  of  their  people, 
it  would  not  have  required  the  indefatigable  application  of  a  D61- 
linger  to  have  collected  a  mass  of  evidence  from  their  own  writings 
equal  in  all  respects  to  that  contained  in  the  famous  work  on  the 
Inner  Development  of  the  Reformation.  The  true  verdict  to  be 
given  in  the  case  under  consideration  we  believe  to  be  that  drawn 
up  by  Beard  in  the  Hibbert  Lectures,  in  a  note  at  the  end  of  his 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  79 1 

fourth  chapter,  where,  in  commenting  on  Dr.  Dollinger's  work,  he 
speaks  as  follows:  "Again  in  a  certain  way  the  Reformation  inher- 
ited the  sins  of  the  preceding  age.  It  arose  in  part  out  of  the  dis- 
solution of  morals  in  which  mediaeval  Christianity  had  ended,  and 
with  which  it  had  more  or  less  successfully  to  cope.  May  not  the 
worst  that  can  truly  be  said  of  it  be,  that  it  had  to  deal  with  a  cor- 
rupt generation,  and  left  it  little  better  than  it  found  it?  The 
monasteries  were  full  of  monks  and  nuns  without  vocation,  who  em- 
braced Protestantism  for  the  sake  of  the  liberty  which  it  offered  to 
them,  and  were  afterwards  its  disgrace."  Or,  in  other  words,  many 
of  the  converts  to  the  new  doctrine  who  had  been  left  in  a  fearfully 
corrupt  moral  condition  by  the  religion  under  which  they  had  been 
reared,  are  afterwards  made  to  furnish  evidence  by  their  unimproved 
morals  against  the  faith  they  have  professed,  but  whose  transforming 
power  they  have  not  experienced. 

II.  Having  now  disposed  of  the  objection  to  our  faith  based  upon 
the  character  of  its  adherents,  let  us  see  what  force  there  is  in  their 
second  charge,  which  accuses  Protestants  of  favoring  immorality  by 
their  direct  and  express  teachings. 

So  far  is  this  from  being  the  fact  that  the  very  opposite  is  the 
case.  Our  confessors  in  the  Article  under  consideration  refer  to 
tlieir  writings  on  the  Ten  Commandments  as  proof  of  the  useful  in- 
struction imparted  b\'  them  in  respect  to  the  various  Christian 
relations,  duties  and  works.  In  the  Article  itself  they  say  with 
the  utmost  plainness  that  good  works  should  and  must  be  done. 
A  separate  Article — the  sixth — is  introduced  into  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  setting  forth  the  necessity  of  good  works  as  the 
fruits  of  faith.  The  works  of  Luther  and  Melanchthon  abound 
in  passages  enjoining  obedience  to  the  precepts  of  God's  word. 
"Both  subjects,"  says  Luther,  "even  faith  and  works,  ought  to 
be  diligently  taught  and  urged.  For  if  works  alone  are  taught, 
as  is  the  case  in  the  papacy,  faith  is  lost  sight  of;  if  faith  alone 
is  taught,  immediately  carnal  men  imagine  that  good  works  are 
not  necessary."  Archdeacon  Hare  regards  Luther's  concluding 
remarks  on  the  Ten  Commandments  in  the  Larger  Catechism 
as  in  themselves  a  sufficient  answer  to  the  charges  of  antino- 
mianism  made  in  Hallam's  Literature  of  Europe.  The  passage 
quoted  by  Mr.  Hare  sets  forth  the  superior  excellence  of  the  Com- 
mandments with  great  force  and  beauty.      Ranke's  admirable  words 


792  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

also  deserve  a  place  in  this  connection:  "It  is  in  this  that  Luther 
seeks  his  chief  glory,  in  applying  the  principles  of  the  gospel  to 
common  life.  More  especially  did  he  deem  himself  bound  to  in- 
struct the  various  classes  of  society — the  magistrates  and  those 
under  authority,  fathers  and  other  members  of  families — concerning 
their  duties  from  a  religious  point  of  view.  He  displays  an  incom- 
parable talent  for  popular  teaching.  He  directs  the  parsons  how 
they  are  to  preach,  so  as  to  edify  the  common  people;  the  school- 
masters, how  they  are  to  instruct  the  young  in  the  several  stages,  to 
combine  secular  knowledge  with  religion,  to  avoid  all  exaggeration ; 
the  masters  of  families,  how  they  are  to  train  their  households  in 
the  fear  of  God.  He  draws  up  a  series  of  texts  to  guide  all  in  right 
living,  the  clergy  and  the  laity,  men  and  women,  parents  and  chil- 
dren, servants  and  maids,  young  and  old.  He  gives  them  a  form  for 
blessing  and  grace  at  table,  for  morning  and  evening  prayer.  He  is 
the  patriarch  of  the  severe  and  devout  domestic  discipline  and  man- 
ners of  the  families  in  Northern  Germany." 

Equally  decided  as  that  of  Luther  is  the  testimony  borne  by 
Melanchthon,  by  Chemnitz,  and  many  others,  in  behalf  of  the  im- 
portance and  obligation  of  obedience  to  the  moral  law.  Osiander 
himself  a  Lutheran  theologian,  entertained  the  idea  that  according 
to  Melanchthon  and  others  God  justified  the  believers  without  mak- 
ing any  change  in  their  moral  condition.  This  charge  was  repudi- 
ated by  his  oJDponents,  who  denied  that  by  justification  they  intended 
such  a  judgment  passed  by  God  upon  the  sinner  as  leaves  him 
inwardly  unchanged.  They  affirmed,  on  the  other  hand,  that  with 
the  declaration  that  the  believer  is  righteous,  is  immediately  con- 
nected the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit  toward  illumination,  renova- 
tion and  new  obedience.  They  also  pointed  out  to  Osiander  that 
they  maintained,  as  a  result  of  God's  sentence  of  justification,  a  real 
union  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  believer.  Such  is  the 
account  Prof.  Ritschl  gives  of  the  difference  between  Osiander  and 
Melanchthon  on  the  subject  of  justification. 

In  addition  to  this  testimony  of  leading  individuals,  we  have  the 
evidence  of  our  confessional  writings  as  to  what  was  taught  in  our 
churches  on  the  subject  of  good  works.  The  Augsburg  Confession 
in  Article  Sixth  says :  "  Also  they  teach  that  this  faith  should  bring 
forth  good  fruits,  and  that  men  ought  to  do  the  good  works  com- 
manded of  God,  because  it  is  God's  will."     "We  should  and  must 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  793 

do  good  works,"  says  the  Apology,  "because  God  requires  them: 
they  are  the  fruits  of  faith."  The  Formula  of  Concord  declares  : 
"  We  believe,  teach  and  confess  that  all  men,  but  especially  those 
who  are  regenerated  and  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  under 
obligation  to  do  good  works  *  *  *  *  Faith  is  first  enkindled 
in  u"s  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  conversion,  through  the  hearing  of  the 
gospel.  This  faith  apprehends  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  through 
which  the  individual  is  justified.  Afterward  he  is  also  renewed  and 
sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  after  such  renewal  and  sancti- 
fication  the  fruits  or  good  works  follow.  This  is  not  to  be  under- 
stood as  if  justification  and  renewal  are  separated  from  each  other, 
so  that  true  faith  can  sometimes  exist  in  connection  with  an  evil  de- 
sign for  a  season  ;  but  here  the  order  alone  is  exhibited  according 
to  which  the  one  precedes  or  succeeds  the  other."  Moehler,  the 
Catholic  author  of  "  Symbolism,"  admits  that  there  is  another  side 
to  the  Lutheran  principle  of  faith,  whereby  it  becomes  the  fruitful 
mother  of  love  and  good  works.  Bossuet,  another  Catholic  divine. 
also  acknowledges:  "Luther  did  not  exclude  from  justification  a 
sincere  repentance,  namely,  the  horror  of  sin  and  the  will  to  do 
good,  and,  in  short,  the  conversion  of  the  heart,  and  judged  it  as 
absurd  as  we  do  to  be  justified  without  contrition  or  repentance." 

Now  from  the  foregoing  extracts  it  is  evident  that  the  general 
tone  and  spirit  of  Protestant  writers  is  decidedly  favorable  to  mor- 
ality and  holiness;  and  knowing  their  general  intention  to  be  to 
commend  and  encourage  the  cause  of  righteousness,  we  can  feel 
sure  that  if  any  passages  are  found  in  any  of  their  writings  of  an 
opposite  character,  they  must  be  capable  of  an  interpretation  con- 
sistent both  with  true  morality  and  sound  doctrine  ;  or  if  there  is  a 
real  departure  from  the  truth,  it  must  be  regarded  not  as  a  wilful 
sin  on  their  part,  but  one  of  infirmity,  such  as  any  man,  however 
advanced  in  the  divine  life,  is  liable  to  commit.  In  regard  to  the 
passages  commonly  cited  to  show  that  Luther  and  Melanchthon 
maintained  sentiments  immoral  in  themselves,  and  therefore  neces- 
sarily promotive  of  vice,  it  will  be  found  on  due  examination  that 
there  is  nothing  in  them  to  warrant  the  unfavorable  conclusion  often 
drawn  therefrom. 

Bellarmine,  as  we  have  already  seen  in  the  former  part  of  this 
lecture,  criticises  the  following  sentence  from  Luther's  Treatise  on 
Christian  Liberty  :   "  Good  works  do  not  make  a  man  good,  nor  bad 


794  AUGSEURG    CONFESSION. 

ones  make  him  bad."  That  this  expression,  properly  understood, 
contains  no  error,  but  a  most  important  truth,  can  be  seen  at  a  glance 
by  any  unprejudiced  mind.  The  correctness  of  this  judgment  will 
appear  quite  readily  when  the  whole  passage  of  which  it  forms  a 
part,  is  examined.  It  is  found  in  Luther's  Primary  Works,  recently 
issued  by  the  Lutheran  Publication  Society,  on  page  1 2 1,  and  reads 
as  follows:  "A  bishop  when  he  consecrates  a  church,  confirms  chil- 
dren, or  performs  any  other  duty  of  his  office,  is  not  consecrated  as 
bishop  by  these  works;  nay,  unless  he  had  been  previously  conse- 
crated as  bishop,  not  one  of  these  works  would  have  any  validity; 
they  would  be  foolish,  childish  and  ridiculous.  Thus  a  Christian, 
being  consecrated  by  his  faith,  does  good  works;  but  he  is  not  by 
these  works  made  a  more  sacred  person,  or  more  a  Christian.  That 
is  the  effect  of  faith  alone;  nay,  unless  he  were  previoush^  a  believer 
and  a  Christian,  none  of  his  works  would  have  any  value  at  all ;  they 
would  really  be  impious  and  damnable  sins.  True,  then,  are  these 
two  sayings;  good  works  do  not  make  a  man  good,  but  a  good  man 
does  good  works.  Bad  works  do  not  make  a  man  bad,  but  a  bad 
man  does  bad  works.  Thus  it  is  always  necessary  that  the  sub- 
stance or  person  should  be  good  before  any  good  works  can  be  done, 
and  that  good  works  should  follow  and  proceed  from  a  good  person. 
As  Christ  says,  a  good  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil  fruit,  neither  can 
a  corrupt  tree  bring  forth  good  fruit.  *  *  *  ^s  then  trees  must 
exist  before  their  fruit,  and  as  the  fruit  does  not  make  the  tree  either 
good  or  bad,  but  on  the  contrary  a  tree  of  either  kind  produces  fruit 
of  the  same  kind;  so  must  first  the  person  of  the  man  be  good  or 
bad  before  he  can  do  either  a  good  or  bad  work;  and  his  works  do 
not  make  him  bad  or  good,  but  he  himself  makes  his  works  either 
bad  or  good.  We  may  see  the  same  in  all  handicrafts.  A  bad  or 
good  house  does  not  make  a  bad  or  good  builder,  but  a  good  or 
bad  builder  makes  a  good  or  bad  house.  And  in  general,  no  work 
makes  the  workman  such  as  it  is  itself;  but  the  workman  makes 
the  work  such  as  he  is  himself.  Such  is  the  case,  too,  with  the 
works  of  men.  Such  as  the  man  himself  is,  whether  in  faith  or  in 
unbelief,  such  is  his  work,  good  if  it  be  done  in  faith,  bad  if  in  un- 
belief." Now  in  all  this  there  certainly  is  nothing  worthy  of  con- 
demnation, for  it  is  but  an  exhibition  of  the  truth  taught  by  Christ 
himself  in  Matthew  vii.  17,  18,  that  if  any  man  would  do  the  works 
commanded  of  God,  his  first  concern  must  be  to  be  renewed  in  the 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  795 

spirit  of  his  mind  by  the  grace  of  Christ  through  the  operation  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Yea,  instead  of  being  held  up  to  the  scorn  of  the 
world  for  uttering  ungodly  sentiments.  Luther  deserves  no  little 
praise  for  being  able  to  enter  so  fully  into  the  profound  meaning  ot 
our  Lord's  deep  saying,  and  setting  it  forth  so  clearly  and  plainly. 
There  is  in  it  a  world  of  wisdom  and  practical  instruction  for  all  who 
are  concerned  either  to  make  themselves  or  others  better.  The 
world  over,  the  first  and  mstinctive  impulse  is  to  begin  at  the  wrong 
end  in  the  improvement  of  character — by  putting  off  the  bad  fruit 
and  trying  to  force  the  production  of  good  fruit.  This  holds  good 
of  ministers,  teachers,  parents,  and  men  in  general;  the  great  majority 
of  laborers  in  the  Master's  vineyard  are  wasting  time  and  effort  in 
trying  to  do  two  impossible  things — making  corrupt  trees  bring 
forth  good  fruit  and  turning  bad  trees  into  good  ones  by  first  mak- 
ing them  bear  good  fruit.  Wi.se  to  win  souls  is  the  man  who  sees 
as  Luther  did,  that  good  works  do  not  make  a  man  good,  nor  bad 
ones  make  him  bad,  and  who  consequently  feels  the  absolute  neces- 
sity of  first  committing  every  tree  into  the  hands  of  the  Lord  of  the 
vineyard  to  be  transformed  by  the  power  of  his  might,  regarding  it 
as  his  great  and  chief  business  not  to  counsel  men  to  attempt  the 
impossible  task  of  making  themselves  better  by  their  own  works, 
but  to  point  them  and  urge  them  to  the  Lamb  that  taketh  away  the 
sin  of  the  world. 

Another  saying  of  Luther's  condemned  by  Bellarmine  is  this: 
"Where  there  is  faith  no  sin  can  hurt."  This  same  passage  is  quoted 
more  fully  for  censure  by  Prof  Moehler.  and  at  still  greater  length 
by  Nampon.  Ward,  an  English  writer,  also  harps  on  this  same  string. 
The  passage  is  taken  from  Luther's  treatise  on  the  Babylonish  Captiv- 
ity, and  may  be  seen  in  the  work  already  referred  to,  Wace's  Luther's 
Primary  Works,  on  page  185.  The  subject  of  which  Luther  is  speak- 
ing is  baptism,  and  his  object  is  to  persuade  men  when  they  have 
sinned  to  rel)'  for  forgiveness  upon  the  promise  of  God  made  to  them 
in  their  baptism,  instead  of  depending  upon  any  satisfactions  they 
can  perform  themselves.  H  is  own  words  will  best  show  his  design  as 
well  as  his  meaning.  "  The  first  thing  we  have  to  notice  in  baptism 
is  the  divine  promise  which  says,  he  who  believes  qnd  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved.  This  promise  is  to  be  infinitely  preferred  to  the 
whole  display  of  works,  vows,  religious  orders,  and  whatsoever  has 
been  introduced  by  the  invention  of  man.    On  this  promise  depends 


796  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

our  whole  salvation,  and  we  must  take  heed  to  exercise  faith  in  it, 
not  doubting  at  all  that  we  are  saved,  since  we  have  been  baptized. 
Unless  this  faith  exists  and  is  applied,  baptism  profits  us  nothing  ; 
nay,  it  is  hurtful  to  us,  not  only  at  the  time  when  it  is  received,  but 
in  the  whole  course  of  our  after  life.  For  unbelief  of  this  kind 
charges  the  divine  promise  with  falsehood,  and  to  do  this  is  the 
greatest  of  all  sins."  This  promise,  he  goes  on  to  say,  ought  to  be 
studiously  inculcated  by  preaching,  because  having  been  once  con- 
ferred upon  us  its  truth  continues  to  the  hour  of  death  ;  the  peni- 
tent's heart  will  be  comforted  and  encouraged  to  hope  for  mercy  if 
he  fixes  his  eyes  upon  that  divine  promise  once  made  to  him,  which 
could  not  lie,  and  which  still  continues  entire,  unchanged  and  un- 
changeable by  any  sins  of  his.  And  then,  after  illustrating  his  point 
by  the  case  of  the  children  of  Israel,  who  when  they  returned  to 
God  in  repentance  first  of  all  called  to  mind  their  deliverance  from 
Egypt,  he  utters  the  sentiment  censured  by  our  opponents  :  "We 
see  then  how  rich  a  Christian  or  baptized  man  is,  since,  even  if  he 
would,  he  cannot  lose  his  salvation  by  any  sins  however  great,  un- 
less he  refuses  to  believe,  for  no  sins  whatever  can  condemn  him, 
but  unbelief  alone.  All  other  sins,  if  faith  in  the  divine  promise 
made  to  the  baptized  man  stands  firm  or  is  restored,  are  swallowed 
up  in  a  moment  through  that  same  fliith,  yea,  through  the  truth  of 
of  God,  because  he  cannot  deny  himself  if  thou  confess  him  and 
believingly  cleave  to  his  promise.  Whereas  contrition,  confession 
and  satisfaction  for  sins,  and  every  effort  that  can  be  devised  by 
men,  will  desert  thee  at  thy  need  and  make  thee  more  miserable 
than  ever,  if  thou  forgettest  this  divine  truth  and  puffest  thyself  up 
with  such  things  as  these.  For  whatever  work  is  wrought  apart 
from  (dhh  in  the  truth  of  God  is  vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit."  The 
case  that  Luther  has  under  consideration  is  that  of  a  believer  or 
baptized  person  who  has  fallen  into  grievous  sin  since  his  baptism. 
How  shall  such  an  one  obtain  pardon  and  get  back  again  the  lost 
grace  and  the  lost  right  to  heaven?  By  the  sacrament  of  penance, 
says  the  Church.  The  virtue  of  your  baptism  has  come  to  an  end 
by  the  sin  you  have  committed  ;  the  ship  of  baptism  is  wrecked. 
Henceforth  your  only  hope  is  in  the  plank  of  penance;  which  the 
Church  throws  out  to  keep  you  from  perishing.  Or,  in  other  words, 
it  has  set  up  a  tribunal  on  earth  to  dispose  of  the  cases  of  persons 
sinning  after  baptism.     The  priest,  as  the  appointed  vicar  of  Christ, 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  797 

has  full  authority  to  try  such  cases,  pronounce  judgment,  and  deter- 
mine the  penalty.  Before  this  tribunal  of  the  Church  every  man 
who  has  sinned  after  baptism  must  appear,  exercise  contrition,  con- 
fess his  sins,  and  perform  the  satisfaction  imposed  on  him  by  his 
confessor.  Otherwise  there  is  no  salvation.  Now  what  Luther 
teaches  in  the  passage  objected  to  is  diametrically  opposed  to  all  this, 
and  entirely  subversive  of  this  priestly  court.  When  the  Church 
says  to  the  penitent  seeking  pardon.  Do  penance,  Luther  bids  him 
exercise  faith  in  the  divine  promise  given  him  in  his  baptism.  When 
the  Church  answers  that  the  virtue  of  baptism  has  ceased.  Luther 
declares  it  continues  till  the  hour  of  death.  When  the  Church  fur- 
ther argues  that  one  mortal  sin  is  sufficient  to  annul  the  grace  and 
salvation  secured  in  baptism,  Luther  then  insists  on  it  that  "  a  bap- 
tized person  cannot,  even  if  he  would,  lose  his  salvation  by  any  sins 
however  great,  unless  he  refuses  to  believe,  for  no  sins  whatever  can 
condemn  him,  but  unbelief  alone.  All  other  sins,  if  faith  in  the  di- 
vine promise  stands  firm  or  is  restored,  are  swallowed  up  in  a  mo- 
ment through  that  same  faith ;  yea  through  the  truth  of  God,  because 
he  cannot  deny  himself,  if  thou  confess  him  and  believingly  cleave 
to  his  promise."  In  short,  Luther  here  teaches  that  sins  after  bap- 
tism are  remitted  in  the  same  manner  as  those  committed  before — 
through  faith  in  the  promise  of  God  in  Christ ;  that  the  old  ship  has 
not  been  dashed  to  pieces  as  was  supposed,  but  still  sails  safely  on 
its  course,  and  need  not  be  exchanged  for  one  of  the  fragments  into 
which  it  has  been  broken.  Thus  summarily  does  Luther  turn  this 
whole  sacerdotal  court  out  of  doors  b\'  his  doctrine  concerning  bap- 
tism, and  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  view  set  forth  and  advo- 
cated by  him  should  fail  to  find  favor  in  the  eyes  of  those  whose 
jurisdiction  is  thus  overthrown. 

The  third  passage  of  Luther's  that  has  often  been  employed  to 
prove  him  guilty  of  favoring  immorality  by  direct  teaching,  is  that 
in  which  he  seems  to  counsel  and  urge  the  commis.'^ion  of  sin  on 
the  ground  that  however  often  and  however  greatly  we  may  sin  we 
yet  shall  not  be  separated  thereby  from  the  love  of  Christ ;  yea, 
even  though  a  thousand  fornications  and  murders  were  committed 
in  a  single  day.  This  certainly  seems  to  deserve  the  severe  condem- 
nation which  it  has  so  often  received;  yet  as  in  the  case  of  the  other 
passages,  it  admits  of  very  satisfectory  explanation.  The  expression 
is  taken  from  a  letter  written   b\'  Luther  to  Melanchthon,  a  circum 


798  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

stance  which  at  once  puts  the  wjiole  matter  into  a  more  favorable 
h'ght.  According  to  Hare,  who  bases  his  views  upon  Bauer's  reply- 
to  Mcehler,  Luther  in  the  letter  referred  to  discusses  the  question 
whether  the  reception  of  the  communion  in  one  kind  only  is  sinful. 
He  expresses  his  gratification  that  at  Wittenberg  it  is  celebrated  in 
both  kinds,  as  instituted  by  Christ.  Then  he  goes  on  to  speak  of 
fearful  calamities  which  appear  to  him  to  be  hanging  over  Germany. 
Immediately  after  this  occurs  the  passage  that  has  given  so  much 
offence,  in  which  Melanchthon  is  apparently  urged  to  commit  the 
most  abominable  crimes  and  with  the  utmost  possible  frequency,  in- 
asmuch as  through  the  riches  of  God's  grace  they  will  all  be  for- 
given. When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that,  just  before,  Luther  had  ex- 
pressed his  apprehensions  in  regard  to  calamities  that  threatened 
his  native  land,  we  cannot  suppose  that,  "  unless  some  evil  spirit  had 
actually  taken  possession  of  him,  he  could  just  then  have  cried  out 
to  Melanchthon,  Come,  brother,  let  us  sin,  let  us  wallow  in  sin,  so 
that  our  enemies  may  indeed  have  good  reason  to  exult  and  triumph 
over  us,  and  that  all  lovers  of  godliness  may  be  offended."  The  fol- 
lowing paraphrase  by  Mr.  Hare,  we  believe,  sets  forth  the  true 
meaning  of  this  notorious  passage,  and  we  will  therefore  give  it  in 
his  own  words:  "When  we  look  back  to  the  previous  argument 
about  the  eucharist,  it  seems  evident  that  Melanchthon  must  have 
been  insisting  on  the  sinfulness  of  receiving  in  one  kind.  This,  Luther 
speaks  of  as  a  fictum  peccatum,  and  says:  You  who  are  a  preacher 
of  grace,  remember  that  the  grace  you  are  to  preach  of  is  not  a 
make-believe  but  a  mighty  realit}',  and  that  it  is  not  bestowed  on  us 
for  the  forgiveness  of  artificial  peccadilloes,  but  of  those  awful, 
cleaving  sins  of  which  every  man  with  an  awakened  conscience  must 
acknowledge  himself  guilty.  God  sent  his  Son  into  the  world  to 
save  real  sinners — not  fictitious  sinners.  Therefore  be  a  sinner,  and 
sin  boldly.  Acknowledge  that  thou  art  a  sinner,  but  be  of  a  good 
heart  notwithstanding.  Do  not  torment  thyself  about  peccadilloes; 
let  not  the  consciousness  of  thy  sins  drive  thee  to  despair;  believe  in 
Christ  and  rejoice  in  him  who  is  the  conqueror  of  sin,  of  death  and 
of  the  world;  and  let  this  faith  prevail  over  the  consciousness  of  thy 
sins.  We  needs  must  sin  as  long  as  we  are  in  our  present  state. 
This  life  is  not  the  habitation  of  righteousness,  but  we  look,  St, 
Peter  tells  us,  for  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth,  wherein  dvvelleth 
righteousness.     It  is  enough  that  through  the  riches  of  the  glory  of 


THE    RELATION    OF    FATIH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  799 

God  we  have  known  the  Lamb  that  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the 
world.  From  him  sin  shall  not  separate  us,  even  though  we  com- 
mitted fornication  and  murder  a  thousand  times;  yea  a  thousand 
times  in  a  single  day."  Whether  this  explanation  of  Mr.  Hare's  be 
satisfactory  to  all  or  not,  one  thing  is  certain  from  the  very  force  of 
the  passage,  and  that  is,  that  Luther  does  not  mean  to  exhort  any 
one  to  the  commission  of  these  crimes ;  and  not  any  the  less  sure  is 
it  that  he  does  not  mean  to  say  that  a  believer  can  be  guilty  of  these 
enormous  sins  and  yet  not  be  deprived  of  the  fellowship  of  Christ. 
He  undoubtedly  aims  to  magnify  the  grace  of  God  to  the  utmost 
possible  extent.  Having  unlimited  confidence  in  its  efficacy,  he  as- 
sures us  that  nothing  can  be  too  hard  for  it.  No  matter  how  aggra- 
vated the  sin,  the  grace  of  God  can  forgive  and  wash  it  away.  And 
then,  supposing  an  extreme  case,  he  declares  that  though  one  should 
be  guilty  of  fornication  and  murder  a  thousand  times  in  a  single 
day,  even  such  a  sinner  could  be  washed,  sanctified  and  justified  in 
the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  and  by  the  Spirit  of  our  God.  There  is 
in  this  whole  passage  nothing  whatever  to  alarm  the  friends  of  mor- 
ality; it  is  the  effort  of  a  great  soul  struggling  after  language  to  ex- 
press the  exalted  conception  it  has  formed  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ ; 
it  is  only  Luther's  way  of  saying,  where  sin  aboundeth  grace  doth 
much  more  abound. 

One  other  expression  demands  examination  under  the  head  of 
favoring  immorality  by  direct  teaching:  it  is  the  one  asserting  the 
necessity  of  good  works  to  salvation.  As  shown  in  the  former  part 
of  this  lecture,  our  Church  was  not  willing  to  sanction  the  use  of  this 
formula,  and  for  its  rejection  has  received  censure,  as  if  opposed  to 
that  which  is  right  and  good.  The  unwillingness  to  tolerate  this 
famous  proposition,  we  believe,  can  be  accounted  for  without  being 
obliged  to  acknowledge  that  it  indicates  hostility  to  good  works 
themselves.  Let  the  object  of  their  opposition  be  clearly  distin- 
guished. It  is  not  good  works  that  they  objected  to.  On  the  con- 
trary they  insist  on  it  that  these  are  necessary  and  sliould  be  done; 
necessary  for  various  reasons,  but  not  for  salvation,  in  the  sense  in 
which  the  phrase  was  invariably  understood  in  those  days.  The 
opposite  proposition,  that  good  works  are  pernicious  to  salvation, 
they  reject  with  the  utmost  promptness  and  emphasis,  "bccau.se 
thereby  discipline  and  decency  are  impaired,  and  a  barbarous, 
savage,   secure,   Epicurean    life    is    introduced    and    strengthened." 


800  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

They  give  as  a  reason  for  not  approvin4j  the  expression  under  con- 
sideration:  "That  it  is  not  in  accord  with  the  form  of  sound  doctrine 
and  with  the  word,  and  has  been  always  and  still  is  set  over  against 
our  Christian  faith  by  the  Papists,  in  which  we  confess  that  faith 
alone  justifies  and  saves." 

Bishop  Davenant  makes  the  following  sensible  remarks  upon  this 
point:  "In  contending  with  the  Romanists  about  justification  it  is 
not  wise  or  safe  to  use  or  admit  these  propositions — that  good 
works  are  necessary  to  salvation."  And  he  assigns  as  a  reason 
that,  when  they  are  nakedly  propounded,  the  Papists  always  under- 
stand by  them  that  works  are  necessary  as  being  from  their  real  and 
intrinsic  worthiness  meritorious  causes  of  man's  salvation,  which  is 
most  false."  He  then  goes  on  to  point  out  various  senses  that  may 
be  given  to  this  proposition  that  are  not  true,  and  on  this  account 
the  formula  in  its  unqualified  form  is  to  be  rejected.  The  long  and 
short  of  the  matter  is,  that  this  proposition  is  susceptible  of  an  in- 
terpretation and  an  application  that  are  erroneous  and  misleading. 
There  are  conditions  and  states  of  mind  in  religious  experience  in 
which  the  counsel  involved  in  our  formula  would  be  unwise,  im- 
practicable, and  calculated  to  lead  to  despondency  and  despair. 
Our  Reformers  were  Augustinian,  and  not  Pelagian  or  Semi-Pela- 
gian, in  their  conceptions  of  the  state  of  mankind  since  the  fall- 
They  did  not  merely  regard  man  as  stubborn  and  unwilling  to  do 
what  he  ought,  but  they  also  considered  him  as  sick  and  helpless. 
They  accordingly  felt  that  what  a  man,  unable  to  raise  an  arm  for 
very  weakness,  needed,  was  not  commands  and  incentives  to  quit 
his  bed  and  go  about  and  attempt  the  work  of  one  in  perfect  health, 
but  encouragement  and  admonition  most  urgent  to  commit  himself 
at  once,  before  doing  another  thing,  into  the  hands  of  the  good 
Physician  who  came  to  heal  them  that  are  sick.  Persuaded  of  the 
folly  and  misery  of  dealing  with  a  condemned  and  helpless  sinner 
as  you  would  with  a  righteous  holy  being,  they  could  not  tolerate 
any  utterance  or  teachings  that  put  the  halt,  the  blind,  the  sick  and 
impotent  to  work  to  heal  themselves  by  doing  good  work,  and  as 
this  expression  was  always  interpreted  to  mean  that  a  sinner  must 
save  himself  by  his  own  working,  they  rightly  and  to  the  comfort  of 
many  troubled  hearts  rejected  the  proposition — not  because  they 
were  opposed  to  good  works,  but  to  the  consummate  folly  of  setting 
a  multitude  of  impotent   folk   to  work   to  cure  their  impotency   by 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  8oi 

vigorous  exercise  and  labor,  or  as  Luther  has  tersely  put  it,  in  his 
Christian  Liberty:  "  It  is  not  from  works  that  we  are  set  free  by  the 
faith  of  Christ,  but  from  the  belief  in  works." 

In  concluding  this  portion  of  our  subject  let  us  call  to  mind  the 
several  facts  that  have  now  come  into  our  possession:  The  Re- 
formers expressed  themselves  with  the  utmost  fullness  and  freeness 
upon  the  various  subjects  of  religion,  and  what  they  spoke  or  wrote 
was  proclaimed  to  the  ends  of  the  earth;  out  of  all  their  numerous 
sayings  and  writings  only  a  very  small  number  of  passages  have 
ever  been  objected  to  on  the  ground  of  their  discouraging  virtue  and 
promoting  vice;  these  passages  thus  censured  and  condemned  have 
been  found  not  only  to  admit  of  a  satisfactory  explanation,  but  of 
such  interpretation  as  to  be  made  to  teach  most  precious  aud  im- 
portant truth.  Now  when  all  these  circumstances  are  considered, 
does  it  not  seem  miraculous  that  these  men  should  not  have  offended 
more  frequently  and  more  decidedly,  and  do  we  not  in  this  fact 
alone  have  proof  conclusive  that  they  knew  from  inner  conscious- 
ness whereof  they  affirmed,  and  that  they  spake  as  they  were  taught 
and  moved  of  the  Holy  Ghost? 

III.  We  have  now  disposed  of  two  of  the  argurhents  commonly 
relied  on  to  prove  that  the  Protestant  faith  prohibits  good  works, 
that  based  upon  the  lives  of  Protestants,  and  that  drawn  from  the 
professed  teachings  of  several  of  the  leading  Reformers. 

The  third  and  only  one  yet  remaining  to  be  examined  is  that 
based  upon  the  natural  tendency  of  the  doctrine  of  a  free  justifica- 
tion, which  tendency  it  is  claimed  is  unavoidably  antinomian.  Men, 
it  is  urged,  will  have  no  motive  to  obey  the  precepts  of  God's  word, 
when  they  are  assured  that  without  the  deeds  of  the  law  they  shall 
be  justified  and  saved  by  faith  alone. 

The  chief  reasons  assigned  for  charging  our  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion with  antinomian  tendencies  are  the  two  following:  The  promi- 
nent external  motives  that  constrain  men  to  avoid  wrong-doing  and 
follow  after  righteousness  are  the  threatening  of  punishment  and  the 
promise  of  reward,  and  the  force  of  these  is  taken  away  by  belief  in 
the  theory  of  faith  advocated  by  our  churches.  These  external  in- 
fluences being  removed,  internal  impulse  alone  must  be  depended 
on  to  produce  the  conduct  required  by  God's  word.  This,  in  the 
case  of  the  consistent  Protestant  believer,  must  all  come  from  his 
faith,  for  that  is  the  only  internal  quality  made  necessary  to  justifi- 


802  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

cation ;  and  this  faith,  it  is  confidently  maintained,  has  no  moral 
power  in  it  at  all  adequate  to  the  production  of  a  righteous  course 
of  conduct.  Accordingly,  there  being  no  force  within  or  without  to 
constrain  to  a  life  of  obedience,  man,  left  to  himself,  will  naturally 
walk  after  the  lusts  of  his  unrenewed  heart  and  continue  in  the  ways 
of  sin. 

Let  us  look  at  these  reasons  in  the  order  above  given.  The  first 
i^that  the  force  of  the  punishments  threatened  against  disobedience 
and  of  the  rewards  promised  to  righteousness  is  annulled  by  the 
Protestant  view  of  faith.  The  Protestant  Christian  is  taught  to  be- 
lieve that  the  moment  he  turns  to  God  in  faith  he  obtains  remission 
of  sins,  acceptance  with  God,  and  a  right  to  eternal  life,  not  on  ac- 
count of  anything  he  has  done  or  can  do  himself,  but  solely  on  ac- 
count of  what  Christ  has  done  in  his  behalf  Thus  from  the  first 
step  toward  the  Father's  house  he  may  have  hope  and  peace,  instead 
of  doubt  and  tormenting  fear.  The  Catholic,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
taught  that  he  is  not  justified  until,  and  in  so  far  as,  he  is  also  sanc- 
tified. His  justification,  being  based  on  his  having  been  made  inhe- 
rently righteous,  follows  his  sanctification,  and  as  any  man's  obedience 
is  always  imperfect  and  doubtful,  there  is  always  more  or  less  uncer- 
tainty as  to  his  acceptance  before  God  and  his  final  salvation.  This 
uncertainty,  it  is  claimed,  begets  a  wholesome  fear,  which  acts  as  a 
continual  restraint  upon  wrong  doing  and  an  incentive  to  righteous- 
ness, whilst  the  Protestant's  more  confident  and  more  cheerful  view 
of  his  relation  to  God  and  eternal  life  has  the  opposite  effect,  and 
renders  him  careless  about  his  conduct.  As  Bishop  Davenant  says: 
'"  The  Papists  object  that  this  doctrine  of  the  assurance  of  faith, 
which  we  lay  down,  puts  men  at  their  ease,  and  that  the  effect  is  that 
men  take  occasion  hence  to  give  the  reins  more  boldly  to  unholy 
lusts.  Father  Paul  tells  us  that  in  the  debates  in  the  Council  of 
Trent  on  the  certainty  of  forgiveness  and  grace,  it  was  maintained 
that  uncertainty  was  profitable  and  meritorious  besides  ;  that  other- 
wise a  "  Christian  would  become  drowsy,  careless,  and  negligent  to 
do  good." 

Now  in  considering  this  objection  it  must  be  distinctly  borne  in 
mind  that  it  can  apply  to  none  but  believers,  for  none  others  are 
freed  from  the  fear  in  question  by  our  teaching  on  the  subject  of  jus- 
tification. According  to  our  doctrine,  also,  as  well  as  that  of  our 
opponents,  the  fear  of  eternal  condemnation  can  be  brought  to  bear 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WOKKS.  803 

upon  the  minds  of  impenitent  men  to  bring  them  to  repentance  and 
faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

In  further  noticing  the  objection  now  before  us  we  have  the  fol- 
fowing  considerations  to  present :  That  while  disposed  to  admit  that 
the  threatening  of  punishment  has  a  restraining  effect  upon  wrong- 
doing under  all  circumstances,  we  nevertheless  feel  that  the  value  of 
this  motive  to  the  cause  of  religion  may  very  easily  be  overrated, 
and  that  when  it  is  constantly  present  to  the  consciousness,  or  exists 
in  a  high  degree,  it  actually  hinders,  and  sometimes  even  paralyzes, 
activity,  instead  of  promoting  or  producing  it.  Prof  Wace,  in  the 
Boyle  Lectures  for  1874-1875,  in  speaking  of  the  doctrine  of  justi- 
fication as  favoring  amendment  of  life,  ascribes  this  result  to  the  fact 
that  the  doctrine  delivers  men  from  fear  and  establishes  confidence 
between  the  soul  and  God.  He  must  have  very  different  ideas  as  to 
the  effects  of  fear  on  morality  from  the  Tridentine  theologians,  who 
pronounced  it  both  profitable  and  meritorious.  This  is  what  he  says 
on  the  subject :  "  If  I  have  at  all  succeeded  in  explaining  the  mean- 
ing of  the  doctrine  (justification),  it  will  not  seem  wo^nderful  that  it 
should  have  such  an  influence.  Its  very  object,  as  we  have  seen,  is 
to  remove  from  the  soul  every  fear,  to  banish  those  shadows  of  guilt 
which  render  it  timorous  in  action  and  in  thought,  and  to  restore  it 
to  perfect  confidence  in  a  just  and  in  an  almighty  God.  This  is  the 
Protestantism  which,  in  the  mouth  of  Luther,  gave  a  new  lite  to  the 
world.  The  proclamation  of  the  Reformer  was  that  it  is  the  design 
of  God  to  have  dauntless,  calm,  and  generous  sons,  in  all  eternit)' 
and  perfection,  who  fear  absolutely  nothing,  but  by  confidence  in  his 
grace  triumph  over  and  despise  all  things,  and  treat  punishments 
and  deaths  as  sport.  The  rest  he  hates  as  cowards,  who  are  con- 
founded by  the  fear  of  everything,  even  by  the  sound  of  a  rustling 
leaf" 

Again,  the  facts  of  religious  experience,  as  far  as  they  bear  upon 
the  question  under  discussion,  do  not  favor  the  view  that  uncer- 
tainty as  to  our  acceptance  with  God  is  conducive  to  piety;  for  these 
facts  indicate  very  clearly  and  decidedly  that  the  stronger  a  man's 
conviction  is  that  he  is  in  favor  with  God  and  is  in  possession  of  the 
gift  of  grace,  the  stronger  is  his  desire  for  holiness  and  the  greater 
and  steadier  his  effort  to  attain  it. 

The  inspired  writers,  in  appealing  to  men  to  cultivate  holiness, 
evidently  do  not  apprehend  any  unfavorable  results  from  the  assur- 


804  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ance  of  faith.  Thus  the  apostle  exhorts  the  Corinthian  Christians 
to  cleanse  themselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit  be- 
cause they  have  the  promise  that  God  would  receive  them  and  be  a 
Father  unto  them.  St.  John  uses  the  fact  that  we  are  sons  of  God 
now  and  shall  be  like  him  hereafter  as  a  reason  why  every  man 
should  purify  himself  St.  Peter,  having  first  reminded  his  readers 
that  the  divine  power  has  given  them  all  things  belonging  to  life 
and  godliness,  assures  them  these  exceeding  great  and  precious 
promises  are  given  that  by  them  we  might  become  partakers  of  the 
divine  nature.  Now  all  these  appeals  are  addressed,  not  to  the  feel- 
ing of  fear  begotten  by  our  uncertainty  as  to  our  relation  to  God, 
but  to  the  feeling  of  confidence  produced  by  the  conviction  that 
God  is  truly  our  Father  and  that  we  are  his  children  indeed. 

The  objection  against  the  doctrine  we  are  seeking  to  defend  bears 
equally  hard  upon  the  blessed  Gosj^el  of  the  Son  of  God,  if  the  apos- 
tle Paul's  representations  as  to  its  design  are  to  be  trusted.  He  de- 
clares in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  that  it  was  the  purpose  of 
Christ  to  destroy  the  devil  who  had  the  power  of  death,  and  deliver 
them  who  through  fear  of  death  were  all  their  lifetime  subject  to 
bondage.  In  his  epistle  to  the  Romans  he  says:  Ye  have  not  re- 
ceived the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear;  but  ye  have  received  the 
spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba,  Father.  How  well  this 
accords  with  Luther's  expression,  quoted  by  Wace:  "It  is  the  de- 
sign of  God  to  have  dauntless,  calm,  and  generous  sons,  who  fear 
absolutely  nothing,  but  by  confidence  in  his  grace  triumph  over 
and  despise  all  things  and  treat  deaths  and  punishments  as  sport." 

Lastly,  the  faith  through  which  the  fear  in  consideration  is  cast 
out,  itself  calls  into  play  other  influences,  which,  to  say  the  least,  are 
fully  as  efficacious  in  preventing  the  believer  from  acting  contrary 
to  the  will  of  God,  as  the  uncertainty  which  our  opponents  pro- 
nounce so  wholesome  in  its  effects.  The  restraints  referred  to  are 
the  following,  and  their  operations  are  so  well  understood  that  the 
bare  enumeration  of  them  is  sufficient  to  our  purpose.  The  convic- 
tion that  God  is  ever  near  us  and  sees  all  we  do;  the  desire  to  enjoy 
the  esteem  and  good  will  of  one  so  exalted  in  character  and  power 
as  God;  the  fear  of  displeasing  God  and  thus  bringing  upon  our- 
selves his  paternal  chastisement;  the  fear  of  being  deprived  of  the 
Holy  Spirit's  presence  and  assistance;  the  dread  of  the  sense  of 
guilt,  shame  and  misery  that  sin  produces;  the  aversion  to  the  very 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  805 

nature  of  sin,  and  the  doubt  that  any  act  of  disobedience  begets  as  to 
whether  we  are  in  the  faith  or  not.  These  various  motives  to  right- 
eous conduct,  which  fiitli  calls  into  activity,  will  more  than  com- 
pensate for  the  loss  sustained  through  the  casting  out  of  that  fear 
that  hath  torment,  and  remove  all  occasion  for  uneasiness  as  to  any 
injur}'  the  cause  of  morality  and  religion  may  suffer  by  its  expulsion. 
All  things  considered,  the  fact  that  our  faith  delivers  men  from  this 
slavish  spirit  should  be  regarded,  not  as  an  argument  against  our 
view  of  justification,  but  as  satisfactory  evidence  in  favor  of  its  truth 
and  excellence. 

But,  interpose  our  opponents,  not  only  is  the  motive  of  fear  count- 
eracted by  your  doctrine  of  justification,  but  that  of  hope  also. 
What  is  there  to  stir  up  a  man  to  do  his  best  in  the  cultivation  of 
spiritual  graces,  or  to  stimulate  him  to  zealous  exertion  in  the  ser- 
vice of  Christ,  in  the  case  of  a  person  who  believes  himself  accepted 
of  God  and  entitled  to  eternal  glory  in  consideration  of  what  another 
has  done  in  his  behalf?  Does  not  faith  break  off  the  connection 
between  our  efforts  here  and  our  destiny  hereafter,  and  thus  rather 
impede  than  help  in  completing  Christian  character  and  performing 
Christian  works?  The  argument  is  that  the  believer  has  no  incentive 
to  exertion  in  the  attainment  of  holiness  and  in  the  rendering  of 
service,  inasmuch  as  admittance  into  heaven  is  not  made  to  depend 
upon  these  things,  but  upon  the  work  and  righteousness  of  Christ. 
The  believer  is  supposed  to  say  within  himself,  "Since  by  faith  in 
Jesus  I  am  in  possession  of  a  title  to  heaven,  it  matters  not  whether 
I  am  diligent  in  the  culture  of  my  inner  life  and  in  the  performance 
of  duty  or  otherwise;  the  result  is  all  the  same  in  either  case — it  is 
a  penny  a  day,  whatever  the  amount  or  character  of  the  service  ren- 
dered." 

In  exann'ning  this  objection  let  us  inquire  v»^hether  it  is  a  fact  that, 
on  the  supposition  that  our  right  to  heaven  depends  upon  the  work 
of  Christ  for  us  and  not. upon  the  merit  of  our  own  doings,  a  greater 
or  less  degree  of  fidelity  and  activity  in  the  pursuit  of  moral  ex- 
cellence and  the  discharge  of  Christian  obligation  makes  no  differ- 
ence in  our  future  condition.  We  think  it  will  turn  out  far  otherwise 
We  feel  assured  that  it  can  be  made  to  appear  from  the  word  of 
God  that  the  outward  circumstances  of  the  saved  will  differ  very 
materially  hereafter,  even  as  they  are  known  to  do  in  the  present 
life.  The  Scriptures  furnish  various  representations  that  indicate 
52 


8o6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

with  much  clearness  that  there  are  differences  in  external  condition 
in  heaven  as  well  as  upon  earth.  For  instance,  the  apostle  Paul  in 
the  15th  chapter  of  first  Corinthians  sets  forth  the  great  variety  that 
exists  in  the  objects  of  this  world;  all  flesh  is  not  the  same  flesh,  but 
differs  in  the  case  of  men,  of  beasts,  of  fishes,  and  of  birds.  So  also 
there  is  a  difference  between  celestial  bodies  and  bodies  terrestrial. 
The  sun,  moon  and  stars  differ  in  glory;  and  again  one  star  from 
another.  Then  he  adds,  "so  also  is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead." 
The  idea  of  the  apostle  seems  to  be  that  different  kinds  of  nature 
take  upon  themselves  different  outward  forms.  The  higher  the 
nature  the  nobler  the  body  assumed.  And  there  is  every  reason  to 
believe  that  what  holds  good  in  respect  to  the  different  kinds  of 
nature  is  a  law  also  in  respect  to  different  degrees  of  the  same  nature. 
The  nobler  the  nature  the  nobler  the  external  form  in  which  it  is 
clothed.  Consequently  the  higher  the  degree  of  holiness — which  is 
the  sum  of  all  moral  excellence— the  nobler  and  better  the  resurrec- 
tion body.  Superiority  of  inner  life  will  express  itself  in  superior 
external  form.  This  is  already  of  itself  a  difference  in  outward 
condition,  for  superior  bodily  excellence  is  an  advantage  by  no 
means  to  be  despised.  But  having  reason  to  believe  that  hereafter 
there  will  be  a  perfect  adjustment  between  the  nature  of  all  God's 
creatures  and  their  external  circumstances,  we  feel  confident  that 
superiority  in  outward  condition  may  be  inferred  from  superiority 
of  character. 

Still  more  decided  and  clear  however  is  the  evidence  in  support 
of  this  position  furnished  by  the  teachings  of  the  Saviour  in  the 
parable  of  the  pounds  and  of  the  talents.  The  parables  in  general 
reveal  to  us  the  unseen  things  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  by  means 
of  the  known  things  of  this  world. 

The  Saviour,  before  whose  eye  both  worlds  lie  equally  open,  tells 
us  what  he  sees  in  the  one  by  comparison  with  what  we  know 
in  the  other.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is- like  unto  a  man  going 
into  a  far  country  who  delivered  his  goods  into  the  hands  of  his 
servants,  directing  them  to  trade  therewith  till  his  return.  After 
a  long  time  he  cometh  again  and  reckoneth  with  them.  Now 
let  us  see  carefully  on  what  principles  he  deals  with  them,  for  like 
him  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  as  this  noblemen  dealt  with  his 
servants,  so  will  the  Saviour  deal  with  his  liketvise.  In  the  parable 
in  the  25th  of  St.  Matthew,  that  of  the  talents,  the  following  are  the 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  807 

facts  given.  One  of  the  servants  had  received  five  talents ;  with  these 
he  traded,  and  made  therewith  other  five  talents.  The  percentage 
of  gain  is  exactly  one  hundred.  The  reward  is  commendation  for 
fidelity  and  the  assurance  that  he  shall  be  made  ruler  over  many 
things.  Another  servant  has  received  only  two  talents,  gains  there- 
with two  talents  more.  The  percentage  of  increase  is  one  hundred, 
the  same  as  in  the  case  of  the  first  servant.  The  reward  is  precisely 
the  .same  as  in  the  former  instance,  expressed  in  precisely  the  same 
words.  The  reason  undoubtedly  is  that  the  diligence  and  fidelity 
were  exactly  the  same  in  both  servants. 

Now  in  St.  Luke,  the  19th  chapter,  we  have  the  parable  of  the 
pounds,  very  similar  in  many  respects  to  that  of  the  talents.  Here 
all  the  servants  are  entrusted  with  a  like  amount — one  pound.  The 
first  one  reports  a  gain  of  ten  pounds  ;  the  second  of  five,  or  only 
one-half  as  much  on  the  same  capital.  As  the  sum  traded  with  is 
the  same,  there  must  have  been  twice  the  activity  and  faithfulness  in 
the  case  of  the  first  servant  as  in  that  of  the  second.  Will  there  be 
any  difference  in  the  reward?  or  will  the  declaration  of  the  Saviour 
be  precisely  the  same  to  the  second  as  the  first,  as  we  found  it  to  be 
in  the  parable  by  St.  Matthew?  Read  the  17th  and  19th  verses, 
"  Well,  thou  good  servant,  because  thou  hast  been  faithful  in  a  very 
little,  have  thou  authority  over  ten  cities."  That  is  what  he  said  to 
him  that  gained  ten  pounds.  "  Be  thou  also  over  five  cities,"  is 
what  he  said  to  him  that  had  gained  five  pounds.  Here  is  no  word 
of  commendation;  he  is  not  called  good  servant;  he  is  not  pro- 
nounced faithful,  for  that  would  not  have  been  true,  as  with  precisely 
the  same  abilities  and  opportunities  he  ought  to  have  accomplished 
as  much  as  the  first,  with  equal  application.  Now  we  for  our  part 
believe  that  the  Saviour  is  not  careless  in  the  use  of  expressions,  and 
that  the  distinctions  perceived  in  his  language  were  designed  by 
him,  and  designed  because  he  wanted  to  teach  mankind  that  reward 
in  his  kingdom  would  correspond  with  the  utmost  nicety  to  the  de- 
gree of  faithfulness  manifested  in  his  service. 

Nor  is  there,  as  is  commonly  supposed,  in  the  parable  of  the 
laborers  who  wrought  different  lengths  of  time  but  received  the 
same  compensation,  anything  to  conflict  with  the  teaching  of  the 
two  we  have  considered.  That  only  teaches  this  additional  principle 
that  the  motives  of  the  laborers,  and  their  opportunities,  are  taken 
into  consideration  in  fixing  the  rate  of  compensation,  and  not  merely 
the  length  of  the  service  or  the  amount  of  work. 


8o8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

The  following  extract  from  Prof  Bruce's  Training  of  the  Twelve 
expresses  the  same  truth,  "  The  kingdom  of  glory  will  be  but  the 
kingdom  of  grace  perfected,  the  regeneration  begun  here  brought  to 
its  final  and  complete  development.  But  the  regeneration,  in  its  im- 
perfect state,  is  an  attempt  to  organize  men  into  a  society  based  on 
the  possession  of  spiritual  life,  all  being  included  in  the  kingdom 
who  are  new  creatures  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the  highest  place  being 
assigned  to  those  who  have  attained  the  highest  stature  as  spiritual 
men.  This  idea  has  never  been  more  than  approximately  realized. 
The  visible  church,  the  product  of  the  attempt  to  realize  it,  is  and 
ever  has  been  a  most  disappointing  embodiment,  in  outward  visible 
shape,  of  the  ideal  city  of  God.  Ambition,  selfishness,  worldly 
wisdom,  courtly  arts,  have  too  often  procured  thrones  for  false 
apostles,  who  never  forsook  anything  for  Christ.  Therefore  we 
still  look  forward  and  upward  with  longing  eyes  for  the  true  city  of 
God,  which  shall  as  far  exceed  our  loftiest  conceptions  as  the  visible 
church  comes  short  of  them.  In  that  ideal  commonwealth  perfect 
moral  order  will  prevail.  Every  man  shall  be  in  his  true  place 
there;  no  vile  men  shall  be  in  high  places,  no  noble  souls  shall  be 
doomed  to  obstruction,  obscurity,  and  neglect;  but  the  noblest  will 
be  the  highest  and  first,  even  though  now  they  be  the  lowest  and 
last.  '  There  shall  be  true  glory,  where  no  one  shall  be  praised  by 
mistake  or  in  flattery;  true  honor,  which  shall  be  denied  to  no  one 
worthy,  granted  to  no  one  unworthy ;  nor  shall  any  unworthy  one 
ambitiously  seek  it,  where  none  but  the  worthy  are  permitted  to 
be.'  "     The  last  sentence  Prof  Bruce  quotes  from  Augustine. 

The  argument  is  undoubtedly  supported  also  by  reason  and  ex- 
perience. That  men  should  be  rewarded  according  to  their  excel- 
lence and  works,  no  unprejudiced  mind  will  deny.  That  the  qualities 
and  actions  of  men  have  much  to  do  in  determining  their  outward 
circumstances  in  this  world,  is  a  matter  of  common  observation.  To 
a  great  extent  every  man  makes  his  own  surroundings,  and  similar 
causes  will  have  like  results  always  and  everywhere. 

But  not  only  will  there  be  differences  in  external  condition,  gradu- 
ated according  to  the  degree  of  moral  character,  but  even  under 
precisely  the  same  outward  circumstances  the  man  that  has  made 
the  greatest  progress  in  holiness  will  enjoy  the  largest  amount  of 
satisfaction  and  of  good. 

Happiness  is  by  no  means  proportioned  to  the  means  of  happi- 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  809 

ness  which  our  circumstances  afford  us,  but  depends  very  much  also 
upon  our  own  state  of  mind,  and  our  dispositions.  There  are  feel- 
ings and  affections  that  will  make  happiness  impossible  undfer  any 
circumstances  however  favorable,  and  there  are  others  again  that 
will  keep  the  mind  in  a  state  of  peace  and  joyfuluess  under  the  hard- 
est external  condition.  Happiness  accordingly  comes  very  largely 
from  within,  and  not  exclusively  from  without.  On  this  subject 
Chalmers  says  most  excellently  and  truly:  "Virtue  is  not  the  price 
of  heaven — it  is  the  very  substance  and  being  of  heaven.  *  *  * 
All  who  refuse  a  life  of  virtue,  do  in  fact  refuse  the  only  heaven  of 
eternity — the  heaven  of  the  New  Testament;  for  search  far  and  wide 
over  all  the  domains  of  infinite  space,  and  there  is  positively  no  other 
heaven  to  be  found  than  a  heaven  of  righteousness  and  true  holi- 
ness. Were  it  only  a  musical  heaven,  we  ask  of  what  use  and  en- 
joyment it  could  be  to  the  deaf?  or  were  it  only  a  heaven  of  beauty 
and  splendor,  a  panorama  of  glorious  spectacles  over  which  the 
delighted  eye  might  expatiate,  of  what  use  could  the  privilege  ot 
entry  into  such  a  heaven  be  to  the  blind  ?  or  were  it  only  an  intel- 
lectual heaven,  how  could  it  prove  a  heaven  at  all  to  those  bereft  of 
understanding?  or  finally,  being  what  it  is,  a  moral  or  spiritual 
heaven,  it  can  be  no  heaven  to  the  wicked,  or  the  secular,  or  the 
earthly ;  and  that  it  might  be  a  heaven  to  us  there  must  be  an 
adaptation  of  the  subjective  to  the  objective,  or  in  plainer  language 
we  must  be  sanctified,  we  must  be  moralized." 

Again,  our  ability  to  derive  profit  and  enjoyment  from  any  oppor- 
tunities the  providence  of  God  may  afford  us,  depends  also  upon  the 
degree  of  cultivation  bestowed  upon  the  various  faculties  through 
which  we  perceive  and  appreciate  the  excellencies  of  the  objects 
around  us.  A  man's  ability  to  derive  pleasure  from  the  beautiful, 
the  grand,  the  sublime  in  nature,  depends  upon  his  taste  for  these 
glories  of  the  world  in  which  we  live;  one  will  be  unaffected  by  the 
scene  that  thrills  the  soul  of  another  with  delight.  A  man's  ability 
to  derive  enjoyment  from  the  noblest  productions  of  literature  de- 
pends altogether  upon  his  ability  to  apprehend  and  appreciate  the 
thoughts  and  feelings  that  are  expressed  therein.  The  book  that 
one  reader  will  thrust  aside  as  dull  and  tedious,  another  will  hang 
over  with  deepest  interest  and  attention  and  lay  aside  with  regret 
when  finished.  And  thus  it  is  with  every  means  of  rational  enjoy- 
ment;  he  whose  powers  have  been  most  highly  disciplined  b\'  faith- 


8lO  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

ful  exercise  thereof  will,  other  things  being  equal,  derive  the  highest 
degree  of  pleasure  and  profit  from  any  circumstances  calculated  to 
furnisli  these. 

From  these  considerations  it  appears  that  the  cultivation  of  all 
our  various  faculties,  moral  and  intellectual,  constitutes  an  import- 
ant element  in  every  man's  happiness;  and  that  the  measure  of  culti- 
vation of  mind  and  heart  becomes  the  measure  of  enjoyment  and 
advantage  that  our  external  surroundings  will  yield.  Now  it  can 
readily  be  shown  that  both  character  and  mental  culture  are  the 
product  of  our  own  actions  while  in  a  state  of  discipline  here  on 
earth;  and  that  thus  we  ourselves  create  the  constituent  elements 
that  enter  into  our  happiness,  here  and  hereafter. 

And,  first,  moral  character  is  the  outgrowth  of  our  daily  conduct. 
Any  desire,  whether  good  or  evil,  that  arises  in  the  soul,  impels  to 
action  corresponding  in  character  to  that  of  the  desire  itself  If  the 
desire,  by  the  consent  of  the  will,  passes  over  into  an  outward  act, 
it  gains  strength  by  the  gratification  afforded.  The  act  being  con- 
tinuously repeated,  the  desire  becomes  established  as  a  habit  or 
permanent  disposition  of  the  mind,  and  this  is  character.  Now  in 
the  school  of  life  it  has  been  so  ordered  that  demands  are  made 
almost  hourly  upon  the  virtuous  feelings,  as  self-control,  self  denial, 
forbearance,  benevolence,  zeal  for  God,  and  many  other  Christian 
affections.  According  as  we  respond  to  these  demands,  gaining 
victories  over  evil  dispositions  and  indolence,  so  we  advance  in 
moral  character,  and  that,  as  before  shown,  is  an  important  and 
essential  element  in  happiness,  whether  on  earth  or  in  heaven. 

So  also  it  is  in  respect  to  the  improvement  of  all  our  mental 
powers  ;  every  pursuit  in  life  calls  them  into  play,  and  the  man  that 
is  most  careful  and  faithful  to  put  his  whole  soul  into  his  work  will 
acquire  the  highest  degree  of  discipline.  Faithful  performance  of 
any  work,  whatever,  will  involve  the  best  use  of  all  the  intellectual 
faculties  we  possess,  and  such  use  will  always  bring  with  it  increased 
power  of  the  kind  that  was  called  into  activity.  The  man,  conse- 
quently, who  employs  his  gifts  most  faithfully  on  all  occasions  that 
require  their  exercise,  is  the  man  in  whom  these  will  become  most 
fully  developed,  and  superior  development  always  enables  him  to 
derive  greater  satisfaction  and  benefit  from  any  circumstances  in 
which  he  may  be  placed.  He  that  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given,  and 
he  shall  have  more  abundantly. 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  8ll 

Summing  up  our  argument,  then,  we  find  that  in  the  future  hfe 
our  external  condition  will  be  pleasant  and  profitable  in  a  higher. or 
lower  degree  in  proportion  as  we  have  attained  to  a  higher  or  lower 
degree  of  excellence  of  character,  and  have  manifested  greater  or  less 
zeal  and  fidelity  in  the  service  of  God ;  likewise,  that  even  out  of  the 
same  circumstances  we  shall  be  able  to  derive  more  or  less  of  enjoy- 
ment and  advantage  according  as  our  moral  and  intellectual  faculties 
have  been  more  or  less  improved  by  cultivation  ;  and  lastly  that  the 
degree  of  moral  and  intellectual  development  we  attain  depends 
upon  the  manner  in  which  we  discharge  the  duties  of  every-day  life, 
and  the  use  we  make  of  the  opportunities  for  self-discipline  with 
which  God  continually  surrounds  us.  In  short,  happiness  corres- 
ponds with  character,  and  character  is  the  product  of  fidelity  in  re- 
spect to  opportunity  and  duty.  Thus,  after  all,  even  on  the  admis- 
sion that  our  works  do  not  purchase  a  right  to  heaven,  it  turns  out 
that  our  reward  hereafter  varies  according  to  the  deeds  done  in  the 
body,  and  that  the  Protestant  Christian  is  not  deprived  of  the  stimu- 
lus to  duty  which  comes  from  the  hope  of  eternal  recompense.  We 
conclude  this  part  of  our  subject  with  another  most  excellent  ex- 
tract from  Dr.  Chalmers:  "Now  our  safety,  our  state  of  salvation, 
or  which  is  the  same  thing,  our  state  of  spiritual  health,  and  so  of 
spiritual  enjoyment,  lies  in  a  state  of  earnest,  progressive,  aspiring 
holiness,  along  a  career  in  which  the  greater  our  holiness  the  greater 
will  be  our  happiness  also;  or  in  other  words  the  more  virtuous  here 
the  greater  will  be  our  preferment  there — the  more  we  multiply  and 
heighten  our  graces  on  this  side  of  death,  the  greater  will  be  our  moral 
and  spiritual  treasures  through  all  eternity.  Thus  ought  we  to  under- 
stand the  precepts  of  laying  up  our  treasures  in  heaven ;  and  the 
virtues  of  the  new  creature,  instead  of  being  the  price  which  we  give 
in  exchange  for  these  treasures,  or  only  the  evidence  of  their  being 
in  reserve  for  us  by  the  time  that  we  enter  into  Paradise,  are  the 
very  treasures  themselves  which  regale  and  satisfy  the  spirits  of  the 
celestials.  Holiness  is  mote  than  the  way  to  some  better  and 
higher  landing-plaoe ;  holiness  is  itself  the  landing-place,  and  our 
restoration  to  holiness  the  great  object  of  the  economy  under  which 
we  sit.  Christianity  does  not  begin  with  virtue  and  end  with  justi- 
fication— it  begins  with  justification  and  ends  with  virtue." 

Again,  it  is  argued,  that  not  only  are  the  threatenings  and  prom- 
ises of  God's  word  made  ineffective  by  our  doctrine  of  justification. 


8l2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION, 

but  that  all  moral  elements  having  been  carefully  excluded  there- 
from, there  remains  in  it  no  moral  force  that  is  at  all  adequate  to 
the  production  of  obedience  and  holiness.  The  connection  between 
justification  and  sanctification,  it  is  claimed,  cannot  be  vindicated. 

From  the  elements  that  constitute  justification  the  Protestant 
view  shuts  out  sanctification,  retaining  forgiveness  of  sin,  restoration 
to  God's  favor,  adoption  into  his  family  and  heirship  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven.  These  our  opponents  regard  as  external  things,  not 
necessarily  involving  any  moral  change  in  the  justified.  Thus,  in 
their  opinion,  the  only  element  that  involves  a  change  of  character 
is  carefully  eliminated  from  our  doctrine.  And  not  only  this,  but 
we  do  not  admit  any  moral  quality,  they  say,  into  the  condition  by 
which  a  sinner  becomes  justified.  The  condition  is  a  single  thing — 
faith;  and  that  faith  justifies,  not  as  Bishop  Bull  holds,  because  it  is 
a  complex  quality  including  all  the  works  of  Christian  piety,  but  be- 
cause it  is  the  instrument  by  which  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  em- 
braced. Thus,  the  Apology  admits  "  that  faith  is  efficacious  not  on 
account  of  its  worthiness  but  because  of  the  divine  promises."  The 
Formula  of  Concord  declares,  "that  faith,  in  the  case  of  justification 
before  God,  relies  neither  on  contrition,  nor  on  love,  nor  on  other 
virtues,  but  on  Christ  alone.  For  faith  justifies,  not  because  it  is  a 
work  of  great  value  and  an  eminent  virtue,  but  because  it  appre- 
hends and  receives  the  merit  of  Christ  in  the  promise  of  the  Gos- 
pel." Thus  it  seems  we  are  obliged  to  look  to  faith  alone  not  only 
to  justify  us  but  also  to  sanctify  us  and  to  take  our  stand  with  Lu- 
ther when  he  says,  "Justifying  faith  is  trust,  comes  first,  justifies  by 
itself,  and  then  gives  birth  to  all  graces."  Faith  is  the  one  thing  of 
all  the  parts  of  justification  that  is  within  us,  and  thus  becomes  the 
only  point  of  attachment  for  all  the  Christian  virtues  and  the  Chris- 
tian works  that  the  word  of  God  requires.  Will  the  existence  of 
justifying  faith  insure  the  various  effects  involved  in  sanctification? 

Let  us,  in  seeking  to  answer  this  question,  distinctly  bear  in  mind 
that  the  object  that  must  be  secured  is  sanctification,  or  the  produc- 
tion of  holiness  and  obedience  to  the  divine  will,  and  this  must 
somehow  be  the  fruit  of  faith.  Now,  holiness  is  not  a  mere  logical 
process,  but,  in  the  words  of  Prof  VVace,  "  something  created  and 
developed  in  us  by  the  influence  of  a  personal  Spirit  on  our  souls." 
According  to  the  Scriptures  it  is  Christ  that  has  undertaken  to  save 
his  people  from  their  sins;  that  gave  himself  for  the  church  that  he 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  8 1 


3 


might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it,  and  present  it  to  himself  at  last  as  a 
glorious  church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such  thing. 
This  purification  Christ  brings  about  by  the  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  for,  as  Dr.  Newman  well  says  :  "  Since  his  ascension  Christ 
has  ceased  to  act  by  his  own  hand,  but  sends  his  Spirit  to  take  his 
place,  he  himself  coming  again  by  his  Spirit.  This  is  evidently  the 
truth  taught  by  the  Saviour  himself  in  John  xiv.  16-18." 

The  Holy  Spirit,  bestowed  by  Christ,  takes  up  his  abode  perma- 
nently in  the  soul  of  the  believer,  brings  him  under  the  influence  of 
the  truth,  and  works  in  him  that  love  which  is  the  fulfilling  of  the 
law.  We  need  not  stop  to  show  that  these  agencies  and  means, 
expressly  appointed  for  this  purpose,  will  prove  adequate  to  the  pro- 
duction of  holiness  and  obedience.  Proof  of  this  will  be  furnished 
in  the  further  discussion  of  this  subject ;  besides,  the  efficiency  of 
the  instrumentalities  is  generally  admitted.  The  point  to  be  estab- 
lished here  is  that  faitji  brings  us  into  connection  with  them — unites 
us  to  Christ,  secures  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  subjects  us  to  the 
power,  of  truth,  and  begets  in  us  that  love  to  God  and  to  man  on 
which  hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets.  If  faith  can  accomplish 
this  connection,  then  our  question  is  decided  in  the  affirmative,  and 
the  fact  is  established  that  the  faith  which  justifies  also  sanctifies, 
and  the  charge  that  it  prohibits  good  works  must  be  withdrawn. 

And,  first,  will  faith  bring  us  into  union  with  Christ  so  as  to  secure 
his  active  co-operation  in  the  work  of  delivering  our  souls  from  the 
dominion  of  sin?  The  union  contemplated  will  require  the  consent 
of  both  parties  concerned — that  of  Christ,  who  is  to  save,  and  that 
of  the  penitent,  who  is  to  be  saved;  and  the  moment  both  are  willing 
the  union  is  consummated,  and  the  work  of  deliverance  from  sin  is 
begun.  Just  as  the  physician  and  the  patient  have  come  together, 
when  the  former  has  agreed  to  undertake  the  sick  man's  cure,  and 
the  latter  has  concluded  to  submit  himself  into  the  physcian's  hands 
for  treatment,  so  Christ  and  the  lost  sinner  have  come  together  when 
Christ  consents  to  undertake  the  sinner's  salvation  from  sin,  and  the 
sinner  himself  has  decided  to  surrender  himself  to  Christ  to  be 
healed  of  all  his  spiritual  diseases. 

As  far  as  Christ  is  concerned,  he  is  ever  ready  and  willing  to  per- 
form his  part  in  the  work.  He  gave  himself  for  the  church,  to 
sanctify  and  cleanse  it,  and  he  will  not  be  remiss  in  the  office  he  has 
taken  upon  himself     He  came  to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  is  lost; 


8  14  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

he  went  about  doing  good.  And  he  has  expressly  and  emphatically 
declared.  "  him  that  cometh  unto  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out." 
Christ,  as  shown,  being  always  willing  to  accept  men  for  salvation, 
it  only  remains  for  the  sinner  to  consent  to  commit  himself  into 
Christ's  hands  in  order  to  complete  the  union,  and  to  bring  into 
action  the  various  agencies  and  appliances  appointed  for  man's 
deliverance  from  sin  and  his  restoration  to  holiness.  This  is  clearly 
the  teaching  of  Christ  himself  in  various  declarations  that  fell  from 
his  own  lips.  "  How  often  would  I  have  gathered  tliy  children 
together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  but 
ye  would  not."  And  to  the  Jews  he  said  on  another  occasion  with 
the  utmost  plainness,  "  Ye  will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  might  have 
life."  Both  these  passages  teach  that  if  men  had  been  willing,  their 
salvation  would  have  been  assured.  This  fact  simplifies  the  question 
to  be  answered  and  reduces  it  to  this  form :  Will  faith,  wherever  it 
exists,  secure  the  believer's  consent  to  submit  himself  into  the  hands 
of  Christ  for  spiritual  treatment?  The  physician  stands  ready. 
Will  the  sick  man  accept  him?  Will  faith  make  him  willing  to 
submit  himself  into  his  hands? 

To  answer  this  question  let  us  determine  what  conditions  of  mind 
are  necessary  to  induce  this  willingness  and  self-surrender.  We 
say  there  must  be  in  the  first  place  a  sincere  desire  for  the  salvation 
that  Christ  has  to  bestow — a  desire  for  the  pardon  of  sin  and 
restoration  to  the  friendship  of  God — a  desire  also  for  deliverance 
from  sin  and  restoration  to  holiness.  Unless  a  man  is  sincerely 
concerned  to  secure  the  blessings  which  Christ  came  to  impart,  he 
certainly  will  not  take  the  trouble  of  going  in  pursuit  of  them. 
Again,  this  desire  must  be  sufficiently  strong  to  make  a  man  willing 
to  accept  the  blessings  wished  for  in  any  way  and  on  any  conditions 
according  to  which  it  may  please  Christ  to  communicate  them. 
Many  a  young  man  appreciates  the  advantage  which  a  full  course 
at  college  secures,  and  would  like  to  possess  them,  but  unfortunately 
he  does  not  desire  them  sufficiently  to  subject  himself  to  the  labori- 
ous and  self-denying  process  involved  in  such  a  course.  Before  his 
desire  will  lead  to  any  practical  results  it  must  rise  to  a  height  in 
which  it  will  accept  the  course  notwithstanding  the  hard  work  and 
the  self-denial  that  belong  to  it.  So  in  respect  to  the  vastly  greater 
blessings  of  holiness,  one  must  desire  them  to  such  a  degree  as  to 
be  willing  to  submit  to  the  entire  discipline   Christ  in  his  wisdom 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  815 

may  see  fit  to  ordain.  This,  as  any  one  can  see,  implies  a  complete 
surrender  of  one's  self  into  the  hands  of  the  Saviour,  and  involves 
an  act  of  the  will.  • 

To  this  desire  another  element,  however,  must  be  united  in  order 
to  produce  this  willingness;  and  that  element  is  trust  in  Christ.  At 
his  hands  we  are  to  receive  the  unspeakable  gift  of  salvation.  But 
we  are  sinners,  under  sentence  of  condemnation;  and  can  we  in  such 
a  case  look  for  favors  at  the  hands  of  Christ?  It  is  evident  that 
before  we  can  come  to  him  for  the  gift  of  his  Holy  Spirit  to  ac- 
complish our  sanctification,  we  must  trust  in  his  mercy  and  believe 
in  his  willingness  to  forgive  us  our  sins.  So  likewise  trust  is  nec- 
essary to  induce  us  to  make  the  complete  self-surrender  required  to 
our  salvation.  No  man  will  unqualifiedly  subject  himself  to  the 
control  of  another  unless  he  has  unlimited  confidence  in  his  wisdom 
and  good  will.  Nor  will  any  man  agree  in  all  things  to  follow  the 
directions  and  submit  to  the  requirements  of  Christ  unless  he  is 
persuaded  that  Christ  is  more  competent  to  direct  him  than  he  is 
himself,  and  that  Christ  is  truly  his  friend,  and  aims  at  his  advantage 
in  all  that  he  ordains.  From  this  examination  we  find  that  in  order 
to  beget  the  willingness  which  will  lead  a  man  to  submit  himself 
into  the  hands  of  Christ  for  sanctification,  there  must  be  an  honest 
and  unqualified  desire  for  the  blessing  he  has  to  bestow,  and  at  the 
same  time  full  confidence  in  his  wisdom  and  goodness. 

Now,  does  faith  include  in  itself  these  two  elements — of  desire 
and  trust?  Does  it  include  desire  ?  Faith  presupposes  contrition 
in  respect  to  sin  ;  never  exists  unless  contrition  has  previously  ex- 
isted. And  contrition  unquestionably  constitutes  desire  for  recon- 
ciliation with  God,  as  also  for  freedom  from  the  power  of  sin.  In 
the  opinion  of  our  Confessional  teachings,  contrition  and  faith  are 
the  two  parts  of  repentance,  using  the  word  repentance  in  its  larger 
sense.  Faith,  therefore,  necessarily  presupposes  contrition,  that  being 
the  first  part  of  repentance.  Luther  says,  "  Faith  is  inseparable  from 
contrition."  The  Apology  declares,  "  Faith  dwells  in  those  who  are 
truly  penitent,  whose  alarmed  consciences  feel  the  wrath  of  God  and 
their  own  sins."  The  Formula  of  Concord  says,  "  A  true  and  sav- 
ing faith,  therefore,  does  not  dwell  in  those  who  entertain  no  contri- 
tion and  sorrow,  and  who  have  the  evil  design  to  remain  in  sin  and 
to  persevere  in  it."  Accordingly  in  every  case  in  which  faith  is 
known  to  exist,  in  every  such  case  we  are  assured  that   contrition 


8l6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION 

has  preceded.  Now  this  contrition  which  always  accompanies  faith 
is  describeci  as  including  acknowledgment  of  sin,  sorrow  for  sin  and 
abstinence  therefrom;  and  a  state  of  mind  like  this,  as  all  who  have 
experienced  it  can  testify,  certainly  contains  an  earnest  and  honest 
desire  for  deliverance  from  sin,  or  as  the  Apology  expresses  it : 
"  Such  a  heart  or  conscience  that  has  fully  felt  its  wretchedness  and 
sins  and  is  truly  alarmed,  will  not  relish  or  seek  the  lusts  of  the 
world."  Where  there  is  anything  like  a  true  realization  of  the  evil 
of  sin,  its  degradation,  its  guilt,  its  ruinous  tendency,  and  where,  in 
addition,  there  is  a  sense  of  personal  sinfulness,  depravity  and  peril, 
there  will  arise  a  strong  desire  for  deliverance  from  the  punishment 
and  from  the  power  of  sin.  The  contrition  presupposed  by  faith  ac- 
cordingly supplies  the  element  of  desire  needful  to  move  the  mind 
in  search  of  a  deliverer. 

But,  faith  also  includes  in  itself  the  trust  that  will  result  in  the  be- 
liever committing  himself  into  the  hands  of  Christ  for  salvation. 
The  anxiety  awakened  in  the  contrite  spirit  gives  the  mind  no  rest! 
it  is  in  misery  and  must  have  deliverance.  This  feeling  of  wretched- 
ness will  impel  to  unceasing  efforts  after  peace  and  joy.  Trust  in 
Jesus  will  turn  these  efforts  in  the  direction  of  Christ,  and  eventuate 
in  the  sinner's  committing  himself  into  the  hands  of  Christ.  For, 
according  to  the  Lutheran  view  of  faith,  it  is  not  a  mere  knowledge 
of  the  things  to  be  believed  concerning  Christ;  nor  mere  approving 
assent  to  the  truthfulness  of  scripture  declarations  concerning  him  ', 
but  it  is  confidence  in  Christ — an  act  of  the  will's  resting  in  him  and 
embracing  him  as  our  present  good  and  as  the  cause  of  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  and  of  eternal  life.  That  faith  will  thus  result  in  the 
entrusting  of  the  soul  of  the  believer  into  the  care  of  Jesus,  will 
appear  from  a  consideration  of  the  circumstances  of  the  case.  Faith 
involves  desire  to  be  freed  from  the  misery  sin  has  occasioned;  it  is 
accompanied  also  by  a  feeling  of  our  own  inability  to  deliver  our- 
selves, and  constrains  us  to  look  for  help  from  without;  in  casting 
about  for  a  deliverer  it  perceives  in  Christ  the  helper  it  needs — one 
who  can  and  will  save.  Now  we  maintain  that  the  combined  effect 
of  this  longing  for  relief  from  present  wretchedness,  this  conviction 
that  we  cannot  rescue  ourselves  by  anything  we  may  attempt,  and 
the  persuasion  that  Christ  both  is  able  and  willing  to  deliver  us,  will 
lead  such  a  soul  to  surrender  itself  to  the  friend  of  sinners  for  salva- 
tion in  whatever  way  and  by  whatever  discipline  his  love  and  wisdom 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  Si  "J 

may  conclude  to  employ.  And  when  this  self-surrender  has  once 
taken  place,  then  the  union  between  Christ  and  the  penitent  is  an 
accomplished  fact.  * 

Our  faith,  whose  effects  we  are  seeking  to  ascertain,  in  so  far  as 
we  have  now  traced  its  operations,  has  been  instrumental  in  induc- 
ing the  sinner  to  commit  himself  into  the  hands  of  Jesus,  and  has 
thus  brought  about  a  union  between  himself  and  one  that  is  mighty 
to  save.  In  the  act  of  sinking,  all  hope  in  self  utterly  gone,  he  sur- 
rendered himself  to  Christ  and  cried,  Lord,  save  me.  Immediately, 
as  in  Peter's  case,  Jesus  stretched  out  his  hand  and  caught  him. 
There  is  where  we  want  him.  With  the  hand  of  Jesus  on  him  we 
know  he  is  safe,  and  that  ere  long  there  will  come  to  us  a  joyful 
shout:  "Bless  the  Lord,  oh  my  soul,  and  forget  not  all  his  benefits; 
who  forgiveth  all  mine  iniquities;  who  healeth  all  my  diseases;  and 
redeemeth  my  life  from  destruction." 

Now  when  an  individual,  desirous  of  salvation,  and  convinced  of 
the  uselessness  of  undertaking  the  work  himself,  has  entrusted  him- 
self into  the  hands  of  Jesus  by  faith,  then  the  Holy  Spirit  is  given 
him  to  abide  with  him  continually,  to  enlighten  his  mind  through  a 
knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  to  incline  his  heart  to  do  the  things 
that  are  agreeable  to  the  will  of  God.  Thus  in  consequence  of  our 
faith  in  Jesus  we  obtain  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  end  that 
we  may  be  sanctified.  Accordingly  we  are  taught  in  the  Apology 
to  the  Augsburg  Confession  that  "  we  cannot  receive  the  Holy 
Spirit  except  through  faith.  *  *  *  fhe  veil  which  covers  the 
face  of  Moses  cannot  be  removed  except  by  faith  in  Christ  the  Lord, 
through  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  is  imparted."  Our  Article  also  de- 
clares that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received  by  faith.  This  is  also  the 
teaching  of  Scripture:  John  vii.  38-39;  Acts  ii.  38;  x.  43-45;  xi. 
15-17;  XV.  8-9;  xix.  2,  and  Galatians  iii.  2-5  and  14.  From  these 
Scripture  declarations  it  is  clear  that  after  attaining  to  faith  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  believer  in  consequence  of  his  faith  receives 
the  permanent  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  it  is  not  on  account  of 
a  direct  faith  in  the  Holy  Ghost  that  the  Spirit  is  communicated,  but 
because  we  have  been  justified  through  our  faith  in  Christ;  the  gift 
ot  the  Spirit  is  the  jnirchase  of  Christ's  atonement,  and  is  imparted 
permanently  only  to  them  who  are  reconciled  to  God  through  faith 
in  the  Lord  Jesus.  Meyer  on  Gal.  iii.  14,  pronounces  the  reception 
of  the  Spirit  as  the  consequence  of  justification  and  an  aim  of  Christ's 


8l8  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

redeeming  death — faith  thus  becoming  the  apprehending  cause  both 
of  justification  and  the  reception  of  the  Spirit.  Dr.  Eadie,  speaking 
on  the  same  passage,  says :  "  The  reception  of  the  spirit  impHes 
justification,  and  is  a  blessing  either  dependent  on  it  or  collateral 
with  it."  Or,  in  other  words,  the  habitual  presence  of  the  Holy- 
Spirit  is  not  to  be  enjoyed  by  any  one  who  is  not  in  right  relation- 
ship to  the  Father  through  Christ.  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
its  permanent  form  is  in  reality  an  indwelling  of  a  divine  being  in 
the  human  soul,  and  this  can  take  place  only  after  reconciliation 
with  God  through  the  acceptance  of  Christ.  That  the  Spirit  comes 
to  us  not  directly,  but  through  the  mediation  of  Christ,  is  evi- 
dent from  numerous  and  plain  passages  of  God's  word.  Matt.  iii. 
II;  Johnvii.  39;  xiv.  16,  26;  xvi.  7;  xiv.  18.  The  last  passage  very 
clearly  implies  that  in  some  mysterious  way  the  coming  of  the 
Spirit  is  also  the  coming  of  the  Saviour — that  the  Lord  Jesus  comes 
again  to  his  disciples  by  and  through  his  Spirit.  All  these  passages 
in  the  most  emphatic  manner  make  the  bestowment  of  the  Spirit  de- 
pendent upon  the  work  and  will  of  Jesus,  and  from  previous  passages 
we  learn  that  it  is  the  will  of  Christ  to  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them 
that  are  justified  through  faith  in  his  name. 

It  is  also  the  constant  teaching  of  our  Confessions  that  we  become 
partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost  by  means  of  faith.  Now  then,  having 
connected  the  reception  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  faith  in  Jesus,  can  it 
be  made  to  appear  that  from  this  abiding  presence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  one  who  is  in  the  state  of  mind  denoted  by  faith,  obedience 
and  holiness  will  invariably  ensue  ?  We  feel  that  we  can  make  our 
minds  easy  as  to  the  sanctification  of  the  man  that  has  become  a 
temple  for  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  If  faith  in  Jesus 
secures  the  inhabitation  of  the  spirit  of  Christ,  we  run  no  risk  in 
predicting  that  faith  will  sanctify. 

Says  Bishop  O'Brien  in  his  work  on  Faith:  "  The  Bible  is  express 
in  referring  the  sanctification  which  it  promises  to  those  whom  God 
justifies,  to  the  direct  exercise  of  the  power  of  his  everlasting  Spirit 
continued  to  the  very  end  of  their  mortal  career,  distinctly  ascribing 
every  advance  in  holiness  which  believers  make,  every  act  of  obedi- 
ence that  they  perform,  every  Christian  grace  that  they  acquire,  all 
holy  counsels  by  which  they  are  directed,  all  good  works  that  they 
bring  forth,  all  to  the  continued  exercise  of  the  same  power  by  which 
it  has  been  first  eiven  to  them  to  believe  in  the  Redeemer." 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  819 

F'rom  Luther  on  Gal.  ii.  18,  we  quote  the  following:  "  Now  after 
that  a  man  is  once  justified  and  possesseth  Christ  by  faith,  and 
knoweth  that  he  is  his  righteousness  and  life,  doubtless  he  will  not 
be  idle,  but  as  a  good  tree  he  will  bring  forth  good  fruits.  For  the 
believing  man  hath  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  where  the  Holy  Ghost 
dwelleth  he  will  not  suffer  a  man  to  be  idle,  but  stirreth  him  up  to 
all  exercises  of  piety  and  godliness,  and  of  true  religion  to  the  love 
of  God,  to  the  patient  suffering  of  afflictions,  to  prayer,  to  the  exer- 
cise of  charity  towards  all  men."  Says  our  Article:  "Faith  alone 
constantly  secures  grace  and  forgiveness  of  sins.  And  because  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  given  through  faith  the  heart  becomes  qualified  to 
perform  good  works.  For  before  this,  while  it  is  without  the  Holy 
Spirit  it  is  too  weak,"  etc.,  etc.  The  Smalcald  Articles  declare  "  That 
Paul  in  Rom.vii.  14-25  shows  that  he  wars  with  the  law  in  his  mem- 
bers, ett:.,  and  this  not  by  his  own  powers,  but  by  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  that  follows  the  remission  of  sins.  This  gift  daily 
cleanses  and  purges  the  remaining  sins,  and  works  so  as  to  render 
man  pure.  *  *  *  Por  the  Holy  Ghost  does  not  permit  sin  to 
have  dominion,  to  gain  the  upper  hand  so  as  to  be  completed,  but 
represses  and  restrains  it  so  that  it  must  not  do  what  it  wishes." 
The  testimony  of  Scripture  is  to  the  same  effect.  "  For  the  fruit  of 
the  Spirit  is  in  all  goodness  and  righteousness  and  truth,"  Eph.  v.  9. 
"  But  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentle- 
ness, goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance."  Gal.  v.  22  ;  Acts  xv 
8-9;   I  Pet.  i.  22. 

From  the  foregoing  examination  we  find  it  to  be  the  teaching  of 
our  church,  grounded  on  the  testimony  of  God's  infallible  word,  that 
the  faith  to  which  we  ascribe  justification  brings  about  a  union  be- 
tween Christ  and  the  believer,  by  begetting  in  the  latter  a  state  of 
mind  disposing  him  to  commit  himself  unqualifiedly  into  the  hands 
of  Jesus  for  deliverance  from  his  spiritual  diseases,  and  that  in  con- 
sequence of  this  union,  resulting  from  justification  by  faith,  the 
habitual  presence  and  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  secured  to  the 
Christian,  the  result  of  which  indwelling  must  necessarily  be  his 
deliverance  Trom  sin  and  his  complete  restoration  to  holiness.  The 
personal  influence  of  Christ  exerted  upon  the  believer  by  means  ot' 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  sufficient  cause  to  account  for  sanctification  in  the 
case  of  all  who  believe. 

But  this  view  of  faith,  which  unites  to  Christ,  secures  pardon  and 


820  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

reconciliation,  and  sends  the  individual  forth  anew  on  his  course  with 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  his  heart,  involving  as  it  does  an  exer- 
cise of  the  affections  and  an  action  of  the  will,  and  accounting  so 
satisfactorily  for  all  the  internal  changes  necessary  to  sanctification, 
is  of  course  stoutly  combated  by  all  who  are  opposed  to  our  doc- 
trine of  justification.    They  regard  faith  as  an  act  of  the  understand- 
ing only — a  mere  intellectual  assent  to  the  truths  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures,  having  no  moral  side  and  no  sanctifying    power    until 
made    perfect  or  effective    by  the    addition    of  charity.      Thus  the 
Apology  complains,  "Our  adversaries  think  that  faith  consists  in  a 
knowledge  of,  or  an  acquaintance  with,  the  history  of  Christ,  hence 
they  teach    that  we   can   believe  even   when   sunk    in    mortal  sin." 
Luther  declares,  "  Moreover  these  perverters  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
do  teach   that  even  that  faith  which  they  call   faith  infused,  that  is 
faith  not  received  b)'  hearing  or  gotten  by  working,  but  created  in 
man  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  may  consist  with  deadly  sin,  and  that  the 
worst  men  may  have  this   faith;   therefore  they  say  if  it  be  alone 
(not    informed    by    charity),    it    is    idle    and    utterly    unprofitable." 
Davenant  says,  "That   misshapen  faith  which   the   Papists  denomi- 
nate orthodox,  Christian  and  justifying,  is  found  to  be  in  most  cases 
idle  and  buried  in  sleep.     Bellarmine,  while  vehemently  contending 
that  justifying  faith  is  nothing  else   than  an  assent   to  what  is  con- 
tained in  the  word,  at  the  same  time  confesses,  yea,  contends,  that 
this  justifying  faith  consists  with  the  fact  of  those  endowed  with  such 
a  faith  remaining  wicked."     Of  course  if  this  be  the  correct  view  of 
faith,  then  there  is  in  faith  itself  no  sanctifying  power,  and  wicked 
men  and  devils  may  possess  it.     As  the  practical  effects  of  faith  will 
be  entirely  different  if  our  opponents'  definition  of  faith  be  adopted, 
we  must  be  sure,  in  order  that  our  argument  may  be  valid,  that  all 
we  have  claimed   for  faith  is  actually  in  it.     That  there  is  in  faith  in 
Jesus  something  more  than  mere  belief  in  the  truthfulness  of  scrip- 
ture testimony,  is  the  opi'nion  of  Protestant  writers  generally.    Those 
who  are  not  willing  to  admit  that  trust  is  an  element  of  faith,  yet  in- 
sist on  it   that  it  is  an  invariable,  inseparable  consequent  thereof — 
that  where  there  is  sincere  and  genuine  faith  there  a  "trustful  recep- 
tion   of   Christ,   though    not    one   of  faith's    essential    elements,   is 
certainly  one  of  its  immediate  and  unfailing  results;  that  therefore  a 
trustful  reception  of  Christ  as  he  is  offered  in  the  Gospel  is  essential 
to  the  nature,  or  at  all  events,  inseparable  from  the  acting  or  exer- 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WOHKS.  82 1 

ci.se  of  faith  in  Christ."  The  practical  effect  is  the  same,  whether 
trust  or  confidence  be  regarded  as  is  most  generally  done,  as  a  com- 
ponent part,  or  as  an  inseparable  concomitant  of  faith.  Virtually, 
theref(M-e,  Protestant  writers  are  of  one  mind  in  regard  to  the  nature 
of  faith.  But  let  us  hear  the  testimony  of  various  writers  on  this 
subject.  And  first  that  of  Luther  himself,  in  that  celebrated  descrip- 
tion of  faith  which  has  elicited  praise  from  such  a  sturdy  opponent 
as  Moehlcr.  "  Faith,"  says  he,  "  is  a  divine  work  in  us  which 
changes  us  and  regenerates  us  of  God,  and  mortifies  the  old  Adam, 
making  us  quite  different  persons  in  heart,  mind,  disposition  and  in 
all  our  faculties,  and  bringing  with  it  the  Holy  Spirit.  Oh,  this  faith 
is  a  living,  active,  efficacious,  powerful  principle;  it  must  incessantly 
perfoim  that  which  is  good.  It  never  asks  whether  good  works  are 
to  be  perf6rined,  but  before  the  inquiry  is  made,  it  has  done  them, 
and  it  is  always  in  action.  *  *  *  Hence  men  without  constraint 
become  willing  and  desirous  to  do  good  unto  all,  to  serve  all  and 
to  endure  all  things  to  the  honor  and  praise  of  God  who  manifested 
this  grace  to  him  ;  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  separate  works  from 
faith,  yea,  as  impossible  as  it  is  to  separate  heat  and  light  from  fire." 
Schmid,  in  his  Dogmatics,  gives  knowledge,  assent,  and  confi- 
dence as  the  essential  elements  of  faith.  Confidence  he  defines  as 
"an  act  by  which  the  will  rests  in  Christ,  the  Mediator,  as  our  present 
good  and  the  cause  of  another  good,  namely  the  remission  of  sins 
and  the  attainment  of  eternal  life."  This  confidence  the  author 
claims  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  most  essential  element  of  faith,  the 
element  that  embraces  and  appropriates  salvation.  This  statement 
as  to  the  nature  of  faith  the  author  supports  by  the  declarations  of 
various  eminent  theologians,  who  all  speak  of  confidence  as  an  act 
of  the  will,  desiring  and  seeking  mercy,  embracing  and  receiving 
Christ.  The  writers  referred  to  are  Chemnitz,  Quenstedt,  Hollazius 
and  Baier.  Meyer  on  Rom.  i.  5,  says:  "Faith  is, according  to  Paul, 
the  convicti(m  and  confidence  (Assensus  and  I'iducia)  regarding 
Jesus  Christ  as  the  only  perfect  mediator  of  the  divine  grace  and  of 
eternal  life,  through  his  work  of  atonement.  Faith  alone  is  the  ap- 
prehending cause  of  the  salvation  promised  and  obtained  through 
Christ;  but  becau.se  it  transfers  us  into  living  and  devoted  fellowship 
with  him,  altogether  of  a  moral  character,  it  becomes  the  subjective 
moral  power  of  the  new  life  regenerated  through  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  of  the  life  in  Christ,  which,  however,  is  the  necessary 
consequence,  and  never  the  ground  of  justification." 


82  2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Davenant  says  :  "  Faith  which  Scripture  acknowledges  to  be  justi- 
fying has  in  itself  the  complicated  act  of  the  will  and  the  intellect. 
For  to  apprehend  Christ  to  be  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  and  to 
assent  to  this  proposition,  'Whosoever  believeth  shall  be  saved,' 
truly  appertains  to  the  intellect;  but  this  faith,  though  at  once  be- 
holding and  acknowledging  the  Redeemer,  does  not  justify,  before 
the  sinner  has  drawn,  as  it  were,  Christ  to  his  own  home  and  joined 
himself  to  the  Mediator;  and  this  does  not  happen  unless  by  that 
act  of  confidence  which,  we  assert,  belongs  also  to  the  will."  Simi- 
lar views  may  be  cited  from  Owen,  who  speaks  of  faith  as  a  trusting 
in  Christ — receiving  Christ — committing  ourselves  to  Christ,  a  proper 
reception  of  Christ  and  his  salvation,  and  Julius  Hare,  who  through- 
out holds  and  ably  vindicates  the  Lutheran  view  of  faith  as  includ- 
ing trust  in  Christ.  Bishop  O'Brien  describes  faith  in  the  blood  of 
Christ  as  faith  in  a  remedy  ;  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  as  similar  to 
faith  in  a  physician,  in  an  advocate,  or  in  a  friend.  Ciawford  says  : 
*'  The  fiducial  trust  and  acquiescence  of  the  heart  is  comprehended 
in  faith,  either  as  one  of  its  constituent  elements  or  as  one  of  its 
proper  fruits."  Citations  of  like  import  from  Chalmers,  Prof  Wace, 
Boyle  Lectures,  Griffiths,  Divine  Foot  Prints,  and  Melville,  Golden 
Lectures,  must  be  omitted  for  want  of  space.  Prof  Hill  in  his 
"  Divinity  "  says  :  "  The  Gospel  bringing  a  remedy  for  the  present 
state  of  moral  evil,  the  mind  is  not  disposed  to  accept  of  the  remedy 
until  a  change  upon  the  will  and  the  affections  be  produced  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  Hence  faith  stands  opposed  to  the  love  of  sin  which 
produces  an  aversion  to  the  remedy ;  to  that  love  of  the  world  which 
produces  an  indifference  about  it ;  to  that  pride  and  self-confidence 
which  make  it  appear  unnecessary."  Dr.  Hodge  says:  "  Faith  is  a 
complex  act  of  the  soul,  involving  the  concurrence  of  the  under- 
standing and  the  will.  Assent  to  a  moral  truth  is  a  moral  act ; 
assent  to  a  promise  made  to  ourselves  is  an  act  of  trust.  *  *  *  The 
disposition  to  believe  testimony  or  moral  evidence,  has  its  founda- 
tion in  the  will  Actual  trust  in  a  promise  is  an  act  of  the  will,  and 
not  a  simple  judgment  as  to  its  trustworthiness.  *  *  *  The 
specific  act  of  saving  faith  which  unites  to  Christ  and  is  the  com- 
mencement, root  and  organ  of  our  whole  spiritual  life,  terminated 
upon  Christ's  person  and  work  as  Mediator,  as  presented  in  the 
offers  and  promises  of  the  Gospel." 

Dr.  Valentine,  in  the  Holman    Lecture  on  "  Justification,"  says : 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  823 

"  The  essential  thing,  which  itself  constitutes  the  reality  and  fulness 
of  faith,  is  trust  or  confidence.  It  is  the  "fiducia"  of  the  old  theo- 
logians, and  expresses  the  act  in  which  the  penitent  reposes  in  the 
merit  and  grace  of  the  Redeemer.  In  it  he  accepts  Christ  who  is  a 
perfect  Saviour  and  lays  an  appropriating  hold  on  him,  as  he  has 
been  made  unto  him  wisdom,  righteousness,  sanctification  and  re- 
demption. It  brings  the  believing  soul  and  Christ  together.  *  *  ♦ 
Faith  must  therefore  be  regarded  as  apprehending  the  gracious  work 
and  righteousness  of  Jesus  Christ.  Hence  Luther's  expression. 
Faith  taketh  hold  of  Christ  and  hath  him  present  and  holdeth  him 
enclosed  as  the  ring  doth  the  precious  stone,"  Evan.  Rev.,  Oct., 
1869.  Dr.  Sprecher,  in  his  Groundivork  of  Lutheran  Theology, 
says:  "  Thus  true  faith  involves  both  knowledge  and  feeling;  it  em- 
braces an  act  of  the  intellect  and  a  movement  of  the  susceptibility. 
But  it  is  also  connected  with  an  act  of  submission  to  God,  which  is 
manifestly  an  act  of  the  will.  Therefore,  knowing,  feeling,  and  will- 
ing operate  together  in  faith.  ***!{■  i^^g  g^i  object,  and  con- 
sequently it  has  a  cognitive  element ;  it  approves  that  object,  and 
consequently  it  has  an  emotional  element ;  it  assents  to  that  objeqt 
and  surrenders  itself  to  it,  and  consequently  it  must  have  a  volitional 
and  active  element." 

The  testimony  of  the  leading  Protestant  Confessions  is  in  har- 
mony with  the  view  here  advocated.  Besides  the  emphatic  declara- 
tion in  our  Article  that  the  faith  here  spoken  of  is  not  the  mere 
belief  of  a  historical  fact  concerning  Christ,  which  devils  and  the  un- 
godly possess,  the  Apology  says  explicitly,  "And  that  no  one  may 
suppose  that  it  is  mere  knowledge,  we  will  add  further,  it  is  to  wish 
and  to  receive  the  offered  promise  of  the  remission  of  sins  and  of 
justification.  *  *  *  Again,  Faith  is  not  only  knowledge  in  the 
intellect,  but  also  confidence  in  the  will,  that  is,  it  is  to  wish  and  to 
receive  that  which  is  offered  in  the  promise,  namely  reconciliation 
and  remission  of  sins."  It  may  be  well  to  remark  at  this  point  that 
many  of  these  declarations  concerning  the  nature  of  faith  as  existing 
in  the  intellect  and  the  will  were  made  at  a  time  when  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  regard  the  mind  as  divided  into  two  parts  only,  viz.,  in- 
tellect and  will — the  affections  and  desires  being  regarded  as  parts 
of  the  latter.  The  Heidelberg  Catechism  (in  its  definition  of  faith), 
also  adds  the  element  of  confidence  to  the  knowledge  whereby  we 
hold  for  truth  all  that  God  has   revealed   to   us   in  his  word.     The 


824  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Westminster  Confession  speaks  of  faith  as  a  receiving  and  resting  on 
Christ  and  his  righteousness.  The  principal  acts  of  saving  faith, 
according  to  it,  are  accepting,  receiving  and  resting  upon  Christ 
alone  for  justification,  sanctification,  and  eternal  life  by  the  covenant 
of  grace.  The  English  Homilies  define  the  faith  spoken  of  in  the 
Thirty-Nine  Articles  as  follows  :  "True  lively  faith  is  not  only  the 
common  belief  of  the  articles  of  our  faith,  but  it  is  a  true  trust  and 
confidence  in  the  mercy  of  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
a  steadfast  hope  of  all  good  things  to  be  received  at  God's  hands. 
*.  *  *  It  is  not  only  to  believe  that  Holy  Scripture  and  all  the 
articles  of  our  faith  are  true,  but  also  to  have  a  sure  trust  and  con- 
fidence in  God's  merciful  promises." 

That  trust  in  Christ  is  an  essential  element  of  the  faith  that  saves, 
likewise  has  the  clear  support  of  God's  word,  as  will  become  evident 
by  considering  the  following  scripture  passages,  in  which  the  term 
faith  occurs.  In  Matt.  vi.  30,  viii.  26,  xiv.  31,  and  xv.  28,  various 
individuals  are  reproved  for  the  weakness  of  their  faith,  and  others 
commended  for  the  greatness  of  theirs,  and  by  examination  of  the 
circumstances  in  each  case  it  will  be  found  that  it  is  want  of  trust 
that  is  censured  and  the  exhibition  of  it  that  is  extolled. 

In  Luke  xvi.  1 1  ;  John  ii.  24;  i  Thes.  ii.  4 ;  Gal.  ii.  7  ;  i  Tim.  i.  1 1 : 
and  2  Tim.  i.  12,  the  verb  corresponding  to  the  Greek  noun  for  faith 
is  used,  and  in  all  these  cases  Mr.  Crawford  claims  that  the  word 
means  "  not  merely  the  belief  that  a  certain  person  is  trustworthy, 
but  the  consequent  reliance  that  is  placed  in  him  to  the  effect  of 
consigning  important  interests  to  his  care." 

Various  synonymous  terms  and  figurative  expressions  are  em- 
ployed to  denote  believing  in  Jesus,  such  as  receiving  Christ,  com- 
ing to  him,  eating  the  bread  of  life,  of  which  expressions  the  same 
writer  says,  "  Their  meaning  is  not  exhausted  by  a  mere  belief  re- 
specting Christ  that  he  sustains  a  certain  character,  has  performed  a 
certain  work,  and  is  fraught  with  certain  blessings.  There  is  further 
implied  a  trustful  reception  of  him  and  a  personal  application  to  him 
for  such  blessings  as  he  has  to  bestow."  Of  the  passage  in  John  v. 
40  the  author  says:  "  Here  is  not  only  unbelief  in  a  statement,  but 
thfe  wilful  refusal  of  an  offer,  which  ought  to  have  been  trustfully 
and  cordially  accepted."  Again  in  i  John  v.,  the  apostle  speaks  of 
a  record  or  testimony  to  be  believed.  The  testimony  is  that  God 
hath  given  us  eternal  life  and  that  this  life  is  in  his  Son,  and  con- 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOb    WORKS,  825 

eludes  therefrom,  "  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  hfe,  and  he  that  hath 
not  the  Son  hath  not  hfe."  This  passage  plainly  teaches  that  be- 
lieving on  the  Son  of  God  is  not  merely  assenting  to  what  Scripture 
testimony  asserts  concerning  Christ,  but  is  the  actual  having  of  the 
Son  himself,  without  which,  the  having  of  eternal  life  is  not  possible. 
Merely  to  assent  to  the  ability  and  wilHngncss  of  Christ  to  save  sin- 
ners, without  the  trust  that  actually  commits  the  sinner  into  his 
hands,  has  no  more  virtue  in  it  than  the  consenting  to  all  the  testi- 
mony kind  friends  may  bear  in  favor  of  the  skill  of  a  physician,  with- 
out an  actual  surrendering  of  ourselves  into  his  hands  for  treatment. 

In  James  ii,  the  faith  which  is  mere  assent  to  the  truthfulness  of 
Scripture  doctrines  is  decidedly  rejected.  The  person  holding  a 
mere  belief  in  scripture  propositions  is  represented  as  professing  to 
believe  that  there  is  but  one  God,  as  if  this  settled  his  claim  to 
be  regarded  a  believer  in  the  Christian  sense.  This  faith  in  the 
unit\'  of  God  is  commended  and  is  praiseworthy,  especially  at  a  time 
in  which  the  prevalent  and  popular  opinion  was  that  there  were 
gods  many  and  lords  many.  Yet  according  to  James  this  is  not 
enough.  There  is  an  element  wanting  to  constitute  faith  in  Christ, 
and  what  can  that  be  but  this  important  element  of  trust  in  Jesus, 
which  begets  a  willingness  to  comply  with  the  whole  discipline  of 
the  Gospel  unto  salvation. 

We  may  appear  to  have  given  more  testimony  on  the  nature  of 
faith  as  involving  trust  and  an  action  of  the  will,  than  was  necessary, 
but  our  justification  is  that  our  whole  argument  to  establish  the 
connection  between  faith  and  sanctification  hinges  upon  this  point — 
that  if  our  opponents  are  right  in  their  definition  of  faith  they  can 
safely  defy  us  to  show  that  faith  necessaril}'^  begets  a  life  of  obedience 
and  true  holiness.  Besides,  the  testimony  is  interesting  in  itself  and 
varied  in  expression,  and  bears  upon  a  subject  which  is  not  only 
vital  to  our  argument  but,  what  is  infinitely  more  important,  to  the 
salvation  of  immortal  souls  also. 

Again,  faith,  beside  bringing  us  under  the  personal  influence  of 
Christ  and  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  also  brings  us  under  the  power  of  di- 
vine truth  and  under  the  influence  which  the  realities  of  the  whole 
spiritual  world  are  capable  of  exerting  upon  the  mind.  The  beings, 
objects  and  occurrences  of  the  invisible  realm  revealed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures have  an  effect  upon  us  according  to  their  nature,  similar  to 
that  which  the  objects  and  events  of  the  sensible,  visible  world  are 


826  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

able  to  produce.  This  we  will  not  stop  to  prove,  as  few  will  be  dis- 
posed to  question  it,  but  will  proceed  to  inquire  whether  it  is  to 
faith  that  we  are  indebted  for  bringing  our  minds  into  connection 
with  these  unseen  spiritual  verities.  Now  we  feel  confident  that 
this  can  be  established  respecting  faith  inasmuch  as  it  is  by  it  that 
we  attain  to  a  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  the  invisible  world  with 
its  beings,  objects,  and  events,  and  to  such  a  realization  of  the  same 
as  to  experience  their  influence  upon  our  minds  and  conduct.  As 
proof  of  this  assertion  respecting  the  office  of  faith,  we  refer  to  the 
word  of  God,  which  describes  faith  as  the  substance  of  things  hoped 
for  and  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen,  hereby  teaching  that  it  is  by 
means  of  faith  that  we  attain  to  certainty  in  regard  to  the  existence 
of  unseen  things  and  confident  expectation  of  obtaining  that  which 
we  hope  for,  thus  having  to  do  with  objects  that  sense  cannot  lay  hold 
of  By  faith  Moses  looked  out  toward  a  recompense  of  reward  so 
far  in  the  future  and  so  unlikely,  that  neither  the  power  of  reason  or 
sense  extended  to  the  same.  By  faith  he  endured  as  seeing  him 
who  is  invisible.  Faith  brought  God  near  to  him  and  made  him  as 
real  to  his  spiritual  eyes  as  was  the  king  of  Egypt  to  his  bodily  vi- 
sion. In  John  iii.  1 1  f  we  are  assured  tliat  Christ  came  to  tell  us  of 
heavenly  things,  and  likewise  that  it  is  by  faith  that  his  testimony  is 
to  be  received.  This  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  for  our  knowledge 
about  heaven  and  heavenly  things  we  depend  upon  our  faith  in  the 
veracity  and  competency  of  Christ  as  a  witness.  From  these 
several  passages  of  Scripture  it  is  plain  that  faith  is  the  instrumen- 
tality by  means  of  which  we  know,  realize  and  appreciate  the  persons 
and  things  that  make  up  the  world  beyond  the  sphere  of  sense. 
Archer  Butler  represents  faith  as  the  realizing  power  in  respect  to 
spiritual,  things.  He  says,  "  Its  office  is  to  make  us  see  the  unseen  ; 
to  be  the  visual  sense  of  the  Spirit;  beholds  God  around  us  even 
now;  sees  this  world  pervaded  by  the  providence  of  God  and 
haunted  by  his  angels.  The  spiritual  system  that  encompasses  us 
as  Christians  is  the  constant  sphere  of  faith.  And  beyond  them  both 
stretches  out  into  infinity  that  everlasting  world  which  faith  accepts 
with  equal  certainty." 

Alexander  Knox  says.  "What  is  faith  but  an  apprehending  of 
divine  things  as  realities?  He  who  finds  himself  in  a  storm  on  ship- 
board needs  not  argue  himself  into  alarm,  nor  strive  to  recollect  all 
the  various  circumstances  of  danger.     If,  therefore,  divine  and  eternal 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  82 7 

thirifj.s  do  once  impress  themselves  as  facts,  religion  will  grow  out  of 
that  impression  by  a  necessity  of  nature,  and  in  proportion  to  its 
strength  it  will  influence  all  the  movements  of  the  inner  and  the  out- 
ward man.  The  making  then  of  this  impression  is  the  great  operation 
of  divine  grace.  Man  cannot  give  it  himself  *  *  *  Jo  have  faith 
then  is  to  have  that  lively  sense  of  divine  things  wliich  makes  them 
efficient  on  our  hearts,  tempers  and  conduct.  *  *  *  All  men  would 
shudder  at  feeling  the  shock  of  an  earthquake,  and  would  alike  avoid 
a  pestilential  contagion.  The  things  of  eternity  rightly  impressed 
upon  the  mind,  are  at  least  as  much  fitted  to  subdue  all  minds  and 
work  upon  all  tempers  as  either  the  earthquake  or  the  pestilence." 

To  this  argument,  however,  it  is  objected  that  it  involves  an  in- 
consistency, inasmuch  as  the  faith  which  connects  with  and  brings 
under  the  influence  of  the  whole  truth  of  God's  word  is  a  very  much 
more  comprehensive  thing  than  the  instrumental  faith  to  which 
Protestants  ascribe  justification;  that  in  order  to  establish  a  connec- 
tion between  faith  and  sanctification  we  find  ourselves  under  the 
necessity  of  quietly  introducing  into  faith  elements,  which  it  was  to 
our  purpose  to  exclude  when  speaking  of  the  faith  that  justifies  be- 
cause it  simply  apprehends  the  merits  of  Christ. 

Moehler,  for  instance,  claims  that  even  Luther  in  his  celebrated 
description  of  faith  is  in  most  amiable  contradiction  with  the  Luth- 
eran theory  of  justification ;  that  he  became  entangled  in  his  own 
distinctions,  ascribing  to  faith  as  the  moral  vivifying  sentiment,  the 
power  of  justification;  whereas  according  to  the  whole  tenor  of  his 
sy.stem  it  is  to  faith  as  the  organ  which  clings  to  the  merits  of  Christ 
that  he  must  impute  this  power.  Goodsir,  in  his  examination  of  the 
Westminster  Confession,  cites  passages  from  Melanchthon's  writings 
to  show  that  he  uses  the  term  faith  in  an  ambiguous  sense — some- 
times making  it  equivalent  to  trust  or  a  part  of  faith,  and  sometimes 
using  it  in  its  full  sense;  that  he,  for  example,  ascribes  forgiveness 
and  comfort  of  heart  to  trust,  and  yet  elsewhere  says  that  by  this 
faith  which  comforts  our  hearts  the  Holy  Spirit  is  received.  He 
says  further  that  trust  is  no  more  faith  than  a  part  is  the  whole,  and 
that  it  is  contrary  to  fact  to  describe  the  faith  which  receives  the 
Spirit  and  works  righteousness  as  identical  with  the  trust  which,  ac- 
cording to  Melanchthon,  receives  justification.  He  passes  a  similar 
criticism  on  the  authors  of  the  Westminster  Confession,  maintaining 
that  in   the  chapter  (14th)  on  saving  faith,  they  reintroduce  every- 


828  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

thing  done  by  faith  itself,  the  act  of  beHeving  and  evangelical 
obedience,  which  they  had  carefully  excluded  from  justification  in 
the  eleventh  chapter,  thus  putting  in  place  of  that  instrumental  faith 
from  which  every  moral  qualitx'  had  been  eliminated,  a  full  and  rich 
faith  which  is  the  fruitful  mother,  under  divine  grace,  of  all  Christian 
acts  and  habits.  The  substance  of  this  writer's  objection  is  summed 
up  in  the  following  words:  "Absolutely  nothing  about  faith  has  any 
connection,  either  as  an  element  or  condition,  with  the  external 
justification  of  salvation,  except  that  so-called  instrumental  part  or 
function  of  faith.  What  then,  is  this  part  or  function  of  faith?  And, 
if  it  can  be  pointed  out,  how  is  it  connected  with  the  other  parts  or 
functions  of  faith  and  with  the  internal  elements  in  general,  which 
along  with  the  external  or  imputative  elements  constitute  our  re- 
demption ?"  He  claims  that  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  answer  these 
questions  satisfactorily. 

The  gist  of  the  objection  made  by  these  several  writers  is  that  we 
have  a  certain  kind  of  faith  which  receives  forgiveness  and  recon- 
ciliation by  apprehending  Christ,  and  that  when  we  are  called  on  to 
show  how  this  faith — the  only  part  of  justification  that  has  its  seat 
in  the  mind — produces  sanctification,  we  at  once  and  boldly  slip 
other  elements  into  it,  and  thus  make  it  an  entirely  different  thing 
from  the  faith  by  which  we  are  justified. 

In  replying  to  this  objection  we  admit  in  the  first  place  that  the 
fidiicia  or  trust  to  which  we  attribute  justification  is  not  identical 
with  the  term  faith  in  its  other  sense,  in  which  it  is  equivalent  to  be- 
lief in  all  the  truths  revealed  in  the  Bible  ;  yea,  so  different  are  they 
that  the  first  alone  has  the  power  of  producing  pardon  and  restora- 
tion to  God's  favor,  while  the  second  may  exist  in  the  hearts  of  men 
who  continue  in  sin  and  end  in  destruction.  But  while  trust  or  faith 
in  Jesus  is  different  from  the  mere  belief  in  the  truth  of  Scripture, 
yet  the  former  is  never  without  the  latter,  as  the  latter  may  be  and 
often  is  without  the  former.  By  this  we  mean  to  say  that  the  faith 
which  trusts  in  Jesus  and  forms  the  condition  of  justification  always 
involves  and  presupposes  belief  in  the  testimony  of  Scripture;  in 
short,  that  where  Xho.  fiditcia  or  trust  exists  there  X\\&  fides  or  faith  is 
vlso  necessarily  found.  And  herein,  we  feel  assured,  consists  the 
connection  between  what  Goodsir  calls  the  part  and  the  whole,  and 
which  connection  he  confidently  asserts  cannot  be  pointed  o\.\\. 

In  I  John  iii.  two  faiths  are  spo'Ken  of — believing  on  the  Son  of 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  829 

God,  .'iiul  believing  the  record  or  testimony  that  God  gave  of  His 
Son.  It  is  very  plain  that  the  foriner.  the  believing  on  the  Son,  ex- 
pressed afterwards  as  having  the  Son,  is  distinct  from  believing  what 
God  says  concerning  the  Son.  Just  as  distinct  as  confidence  in  a 
pliysician  whom  we  knew  not  before  and  for  ourselves,  is  distinct 
from  the  testimony  of  the  friend  who  induced  us  to  entrust  our  life 
into  his  hands.  And  yet  at  the  same  time  it  is  equally  clear  that 
the  two  things  are  connected,  that  the  believing  on  the  Son  ensues 
because  we  make  not  God  a  liar  but  believe  the  testimony  he  gives 
in  behalf  of  his  Son.  Such,  then,  is  the  connection  of  the  faith 
called  trust  and  the  faith  which  is  equivalent  to  belief  of  Scripture 
testimony,  that  wherever  the  former  exists  the  other  must  have  pre- 
viously existed,  that  faith  in  Christ  is  an  evidence  and  guarantee  of 
faith  in  the  truthfulness  of  all  that  is  contained  in  the  Scriptures. 
Accordingly,  Chalmers  says,  "  It  is  impossible  that  any  one  should 
believe  in  one  thing  on  the  ground  of  finding  it  in  the  Scriptures 
and  not  believe  in  everything  which  he  finds  to  be  there  ;  or  that  he 
should  believe  in  one  saying  of  God  because  of  confidence  in  his 
truth,  and  yet  not  believe  in  all  his  sayings."  Bishop  O'Brien  in  his 
Ten  Sermons  on  Faith  says:  "Confidence  in  Christ  is  grounded 
upon  the  testimony  of  God's  word  and  requires  of  course  a  belief  in 
that  testimony  ;  but  it  is  manifestly  distinct  from  such  belief" 

Our  conclusion,  therefore,  is  that  whoever  believes  that  Christ  has 
had  mercy  on  him,  because  of  what  the  Scriptures  say  of  his  good- 
ness and  love,  is  in  a  state  of  mind  in  which  he  must  necessarily 
believe  everything  to  be  true  which  the  Bible  sets  forth  as  true;  and 
faith  in  Christ  will,  as  we  have  claimed,  gradually  bring  a  man  under 
the  influence  and  operation  of  all  the  facts  and  doctrines  made 
known  m  the  word  of  God,  and  whoever  has  come  under  the  influ- 
ence of  truth  has  come  under  an  influence  that  sanctifies  ;  for  the 
Saviour  himself  prays, "  Sanctify  them  through  the  truth;  Thy  word 
is  truth,"  cf   I   Pet.  i.  22. 

\Vc  have  thus  far,  in  following  up  the  working  of  faith,  ascertained 
that  it  brings  into  personal  union  with  Christ,  and  as  a  consequence 
receives  the  personal  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  also  that  it  brings  us 
under  the  operation  of-the  various  truths  revealed  in  the  word  of 
God.  We  will  yet  further  show  that  faith  also  begets  and  establishes 
the  principle  of  love  within  our  hearts,  by  which  love  we  are  con- 
stiaincd  to  do  the  things   that  are  pleasing  unto  God.     As  to  the 


830  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

effectiveness  of  love  in  producing  and  controlling  our  actions,  there 
can  be  no  question.  The  Saviour  declares  that  love  to  God  and 
love  to  man  virtually  constitute  the  sum  total  of  human  require- 
ments;  on  these  two  commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the 
prophets.  The  apostle  Paul,  after  mentioning  various  command- 
ments which  Christians  are  bound  to  observe,  adds,  "And  if  there 
be  any  other  commandment,  it  is  briefly  comprehended  in  this  say- 
ing, namely.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  and  reaches 
this  general  conclusion,  "Therefore  love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law." 
Elsewhere  he  says,  "  The  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us." 

In  reference  to  the  influence  of  love,  Alexander  Knox  says,  "  Our 
love  is  ourselves.  If  we  love  base  things  we  are  base;  trifling,  we 
are  triflers ;  earthly,  we  are  worldly ;  divine  and  eternal  things,  we 
are  spiritual  and  heavenly.  Faith  then  is  such  an  apprehension  of 
divine  things  as  makes  the  things  apprehended  the  object  of  su- 
preme love." 

Jacob  Abbott  has  such  confidence  in  the  transforming  power  of 
love  that  he  sums  up  his  directions  to  parents  in  moulding  their 
children,  somewhat  as  follows:  "Secure  their  love  and  then  be  in 
their  presence  what  you  want  them  to  be."  Archbishop  VVhately 
has  a  most  excellent  discourse  on  the  subject,  "  Love  toward  Christ 
as  a  motive  to  obedience."  In  it  he  says  that  one  of  the  most  strik- 
ing peculiarities  of  the  religion  of  Christ  is  its  continual  appeal  to 
the  affections.  He  admits  that  Christ  and  his  apostles  also  address 
themselves  to  the  reason  and  the  interest  of  men,  but,  especially  in 
the  case  of  believers,  they  chiefly  insist  upon  love  toward  Christ  as 
the  mainspring  of  all  their  conduct. 

The  Catholic  system,  as  is  well  known,  attributes  nearly  every- 
thing in  the  matter  of  sanctification  to  the  power  of  charity  (love) 
which  is  the  chief  part  of  the  inherent  righteousness  that  expels  sin 
and  brings  forth  the  works  of  righteousness. 

The  power  of  love  in  producing  obedience  to  the  divine  precepts 
being  universally  admitted,  there  remains  but  one  point  further  to 
be  decided.  Does  this  love  owe  its  origin  to  faith,  or  may  faith  at 
times  exist  independently  of  love? 

St.  John  declares  that  we  love  God  because  he  first  loved  us,  thus 
basing  our  love  toward  God  upon  his  previous  love  to  us.  Now  it 
is  self-evident  that  this  love  to  God  could  not  possibly  spring  up  out 
of  the  love  of  God  toward  us,  unless  we  also  believed  that  God  did 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  83 1 

really  love  us  as  claimed.  St.  Paul  in  Galatians  says,  "  faith  vvork- 
eth  by  love."  Here  evidently  a  close  connection  is  affirmed  be- 
tween faith  and  love ;  yea,  to  faith  a  habitual  working  is  ascribed  as 
though  it  were  its  nature  to  operate  by  means  of  love.  It  is  true 
that  Cardinal  Bellarmine  argues  that  this  passage  ought  to  be  read 
in  the  passive  voice,  meaning  that  faith  is  wrought  or  perfected  by 
love.  Boyse  in  his  work  entitled  "Wrought  Gold,"  has  very  satis- 
factorily and  briefly  answered  this  objection,  by  pointing  out  that 
the  objection  disagrees  herein  with  the  Fathers,  and  with  their  own 
Vulgate  which  is  made  binding  on  Catholics  by  the  Council  of  Trent, 
as  also  with  the  English  translation  approved  by  the  Church  of  Rome. 
Again,  the  case  of  the  woman  at  Simon's  house  teaches  very 
plainly  and  emphatically  that  love  is  the  result  and  fruit  of  forgive- 
ness, as  forgiveness  is  the  fruit  of  faith.  Thus  the  Saviour  in  the 
question  he  puts  to  Simon  concerning  the  two  debtors  clearly  inti- 
mates that  love  will  follow  forgiveness,  and  from  his  approval  of 
Simon's  answer  it  is  equally  clear  that  in  his  judgment,  love  not 
only  flows  from  forgiveness,  but  is  exactly  proportioned  to  the  ex- 
tent of  the  forgiveness.  And  from  this  principle,  that  love  is  in  pro- 
portion to  the  greatness  of  the  sins  forgiven,  he  argues  that  this 
woman's  sins  were  many,  for  she  loved  much.  And  then,  that  the 
love  might  not  be  viewed  as  the  cause  of  the  pardon,  instead  of  the 
consequence,  he  says  very  plainly  in  verse  50,  "  Thy  faith  has  saved 
thee."  This  passage  (Luke  vii.  36-50)  is  in  itself  abundantly  suffi- 
cient to  prove  the  point  made,  that  faith  is  the  cause  of  love.  But 
as  this  is  a  vital  point  in  the  controvefsy  between  Rome  and  Pro- 
testantism, as  it  in  fact  decides  the  dispute  against  Rome  and  all 
who  with  her  say  that  faith  cannot  be  depended  upon  to  account  for 
and  to  produce  sanctification,  they  naturally  make  most  desperate 
attempts  to  prove  that  faith  does  not  invariably  and  necessarily  bring 
forth  love.  Bellarmine  accordingly  discusses  this  proposition, 
"Whether  justifying  faith  can  be  .separated  from  love."  He  under- 
takes to  maintain  the  affirmative  of  this  question,  but  as  Davenant 
asserts,  shrewdly  changes  it  into  another,  "True  and  Christian  faith 
which  justifies  per  modum  dispositionis  can  be  separated  from  love 
and  other  virtues."  Dominic  Soto,  another  theologian  of  Rome, 
maintains  the  proposition  in  this  form,  "True  and  orthodox  faith 
and  that  which  is  necessary  for  justification,  can  exi.st  without 
charity."     Davenant  over  against  them  defends  the  Protestant  view 


8^2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 


'O 


that  faith  and  love  invariably  go  together.  We  will  not  stop  to  follow 
out  his  argument,  as  enough  has  already  been  said  to  establish  the 
fact  that  according  to  the  Scriptures,  love  is  the  natural  and  inevita- 
ble product  of  faith  ;  that  constituted  as  is  the  human  mind,  where 
there  once  exists  a  sense  of  guilt  and  misery  through  sin,  and  this  is 
followed  UD  by  the  conviction  that  through  the  merciful  intervention 
of  Christ,  this  guilt  and  its  punishment  has  been  remitted,  and  that 
in  due  course  of  time  even  the  stains  of  sin  are  to  be  completely 
wiped  out — there  can  be  no  other  state  of  mind  than  that  of  grateful 
love  toward  him  who  has  delivered  us. 

The  teaching  of  our  Confessions  is  very  clear  and  strong  on  the 
subject  of  the  relation  which  faith  and  love  bear  to  each  other.  Thus 
the  Apology  declares,  "It  is  extremely  foolish  and  improper  on  the 
part  of  our  adversaries,  to  contend  that  even  those  who  deserve 
eternal  wrath,  obtain  forgiveness  of  sin  through  love  or  self-selected 
works  of  love;  whereas  it  is  clearly  impossible  to  love  God  until  the 
heart  has  taken  hold  of  the  remission  of  sins  through  faith.  For  a 
heart  filled  with  anxiety  and  truly  feeling  the  wrath  of  God,  can 
never  love  him  until  he  gives  it  relief  and  comfort  and  assures  us  of 
his  grace.  *  *  *  What  the  Scholiasts  say  concerning  the  love 
of  God  is  a  wild  conceit;  it  being  impossible  to  love  God  before  we 
know  and  embrace  his  mercy  through  faith.  Then  only  does  God 
become  an  object  amiable,  lovely.  *  *  *  How  is  it  possible  for 
us  to  love  God  when  involved  in  such  great  terror  aad  unspeakable 
agony,  or  feeling  the  great  and  terrible  displeasure  and  wrath  of 
God,  which  are  then  more  forcibly  felt  than  any  one  on  earth  is  able 
to  express  or  describe."  Even  Alexander  Knox,  who  with  Bishop 
Jebb  regards  justification  by  faith  as  a  mere  notion  and  nonentity, 
having  no  effect  upon  the  heart  and  the  affections,  admits  that  "  it 
may  be  the  legitimate  parent  of  feeling"  in  instances  "  where  through 
error  or  ignorance  there  is  a  despair  of  divine  mercy,"  and  allows 
"that  for  this  malady  the  truths  included  in  the  forensic  system  are 
perhaps  the  specific."  From  this  admission  it  is  very  natural,  with 
the  Christian  observer,  to  infer  that  if  this  doctrine  is  a  specific  for 
the  very  lowest  forms  of  depression,  a  cure  for  the  severest  types  of 
spiritual  diseases,  it  will  be  an  efficient  remedy  in  all  other  cases. 

Finally,  in  summing  the  points  we  have  established  in  respect  to 
faith,  we  find  that  wherever  the  faith  that  justifies  exists,  there  will 
be  the  following  results  as  a  consequence  of  that  faith.     Faith  brings 


THE    RELATION    OF    FAITH    AND    GOOD    WORKS.  833 

the  believer  to  a  willingness  to  surrender  himself  completely  to  the 
control  of  Christ;  this  effects  a  union  between  the  believer  and 
Christ,  and  secures  the  personal  effort  of  Christ  for  the  believer's 
salvation  from  the  dominion  of  sin.  In  consequence  of  this  union, 
the  Saviour  having  now  engaged  himself  to  accomplish  the  be- 
liever's restoration  to  holiness,  puts  him  permanently  in  charge  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  taking  up  his  abode  in  the  believer's  heart, 
is  continually  at  hand  to  instruct,  to  guide,  to  correct,  to  restrain 
from  every  wrong  doing  and  to  incite  to  righteousness — in  short,  to 
superintend  and  carry  on  the  whole  process  of  sanctification  and 
salvation.  By  faith  the  believer  is  further  brought  into  contact  with, 
and  under  the  operation  of  all  the  objects  and  beings  that  make  up 
the  whole  invisible  worhl  around  us,  as  far  as  these  objects  and  be- 
ings are  revealed  in  the  Scriptures;  or  in  other  words,  it  brings  him 
under  the  influence  of  all  revealed  truth,  that  truth  which  is  given 
by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for 
correction,  for  instruction  in  righteousness,  and  makes  the  man  of 
God  complete  and  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works.  This 
truth  'the  Holy  Spirit  makes  use  of  as  a  means  of  promoting  the 
hohness  of  the  individual  given  into  his  charge.  This  truth  contains 
the  most  powerful  motive  force  that  can  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
human  mind,  whether  to  beget  or  regulate  activity.  Besides,  faith 
also  supplies  an  impulse  from  within  in  the  direction  of  holiness — 
the  impulse  of  love,  the  most  constant  and  powerful  principle  that 
we  have  any  knowledge  of — a  principle  which,  according  to  Christ,  is 
the  sum  and  substance  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  the  essence  of 
the  whole  duty  of  man.  Through  faith  then  the  believer  is  brought 
under  the  operation  of  the  most  powerful  inner  im-pulse  in  existence; 
under  the  operation  of  the  mightiest  external  motives  in  the  universe, 
and  under  the  personal  care  and  supervision  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
the  Spirit  of  sanctification  ;  and  if  these  combined  influences  are  not 
adequate  to  guarantee  the  believer's  holiness,  then  we  feel  very  con- 
fident that  nothing  that  the  ingenuity  of  Rome  has  ever  been  able  to 
suggest  in  place  thereof,  is  worthy  of  a  moment's  consideration. 

We  conclude  this  discussion  then  in  the  words  of  our  Article, 
"From  all  this  it  is  manifest  that  our  doctrine,  instead  of  being 
charged  with  prohibiting  good  works,  ought  much  rather  to  be  com- 
mended for  teaching  the  manner  in  which  truly  good  works  can  be 
performed." 


ARTICLE  XXI. 


INVOCATION  OF  THE 
SAINTS. 

By  J.  C.  ROLLER,  D.  D. 


THE  subject  of  Article  XXI.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  gives  a 
clear  and  succinct  statement  De  Ctiltu  Sanctorum  or  Vom  Heili- 
gendienst.     As  read  before  the  Emperor,  the  language  is  as  follows: 

"De  Culiu  Sanctorum  decent,  quod  memoria  Sanctorum  proponi  potest,  ut 
imetemur  fidem  eorum  et  bona  opera  iuxta  vocationem,  ut  Caesar  imitari  potest 
exemplum  Davidis  in  bello  gerendo  ad  depellendos  Turcos  a  patria.  Nam  uter- 
que  rex  est.  Sed  Scriptura  non  docet,  invocari  Sanctos,  seu  petere  auxilium  a 
Sanctis,  quiaunum  Christum  nobis  proponit  mediatorem,  propitiatorium,  ponti- 
ficem,  intercessorem.  Hie  invocandus  est,  et  promisit  se  e.xauditurum  esse 
preces  nostras,  et  hunc  cultum  maxime  probat,  videlicit  ut  invocetur  in  omni- 
bus afflictionibus.  I  John  ii.  I.  Si quis peccat  habe)mis  advocation  apud Deuin, 
cet."     Miiller,  Syntbotischen  Biicher,  p.  47. 

"Concerning  the  invocation  of  saints  our  churches  teach,  that  the  saints  may 
be  held  in  remembrance,  in  order  that  we  may,  each  in  his  own  calling,  imitate 
their  faith  and  good  works;  as  that  the  Emperor  may  imitate  the  example  of 
David,  in  carrying  on  war  to  expel  the  Turks  fiom  our  country;  for  each  of 
them  is  a  king.  But  the  Scripture  does  not  teach  us  to  invoke  saints,  or  to  seek 
aid  from  them.  For  it  proposes  Christ  to  us  as  our  only  Mediator,  Propitiation, 
High  Priest  and  Intercessor.  On  him  we  are  to  call,  and  he  promises  that  he 
will  hear  our  prayers,  and  highly  approves  of  this  worship,  viz.;  that  he  should 
be  called  upon  in  every  affliction,  i  John  ii.  i :  "If  any  man  sin,  we  have  an 
advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous." — Gen.  Synod's  Book  of 
Worship. 

The  phraseology  of  the  English  translation  fails  to  bring  out  some 
few  shades  of  meaning  found  in  the  German  and  Latin  texts,  which 
are  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  noticed  in  the  body  of  the  discus- 
834 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  835 

sion.  The  contents  of  the  Article  do  not  formally  include  the 
veneration  of  relics  and  images,  neither  do  they  specifically  mention 
"Virgin  worship,"  both  of  which  are  in  themselves  vast  subjects  for 
research,  and  will  therefore  only  be  mentioned  in  illustrating  the 
main  thought  to  which  the  present  treatment  is  limited  by  the  Luth- 
eran doctrine  on  the  worship  of  saints. 

Who  the  Saints  Are. 
Although  the  Confession  does  not  distinctly  specify  who  the  saints 
are,  it  is  in  place  here  to  venture  a  brief  definition,  because  the 
question  in  controversy  has  been  made  to  turn  on  a  correct  under- 
standing of  the  declaration  in  the  Apostles'  Creed:  ''I believe  in  the 
coimminion  of  saints."  The  silence  of  the  confessors  has  been  mis- 
interpreted. Even  the  saintly  Claus  Harms*  italicised  his  opinion: 
We  have  no  saints.  But  Carpzovf  summarizes  the  beliefs  of  the 
early  Protestants  as  follows :  "  The  saints  are  those  who  once  believed 
in  God,  were  faithful  to  him,  trustingly  fulfilled  their  calling  in  life, 
and  are  now  living  in  heaven."  This  appellation  is  founded  on  the 
word  of  God  and  establishes  that  the  saints  are,  first,  all  true  Chris- 
tians, J  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Triune  God;  §  separated  from  the 
ungodl}-;  ||.  consecrated  to  Christ^!  and  justified  by  his  righteous- 
ness.** To  this  objective  characteristic  there  belongs,  secondly,  a 
subjective  qualification,  namely,  inner  striving  after  holiness  jff  un- 
blemished earthly  citizenship;  ||  a  steady  advancement  in  the 
cardinal  graces  of  a  spiritual  life§§  and  a  perceptible  increase  of 
power  over  temptation,  |1||  not  implying,  however,  sinless  perfec- 
tion^^. And  the  third  peculiarity  to  be  marked  is  the  distinction 
between  the  saints  on  earth  and  the  saints  in  heaven.  They  are  the 
saints  in  the  church  militant  who  are  found  in  all  places  where  the 
Gospel  has  been  accepted***  and  those  of  the  church  triumphant 
who  have  a  share  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ,ttt  shall  partici- 
pate ||J  in  his  second  coming,  and  with  him  §§§  judge  the  world. 

*  Die  Augsburgische  Confession,  216. 

flsagoge  in  Libros  Symbolicos,  537. 

JRom.  i.  7.  §2  Peter  ii.  9.       _  ||  2  Cor.  vi.  17. 

\  I  Cor.  i.  2.  **  I  Cor.  vi.  11.  ft  Acts  xv.  9. 

UilVt.  i.  15.  ^^^2  Pet.  i.  5-8.  1|||2  Cor.  vii.  I. 

^i^ Compare  Pusey:  Rule  of  Faith,  165. 

***  Ps.  xvi.  2,  3;  Acts  ix.  32;  2  Cor.  i.  2. 

ttt  Matt,  xxvii.  52.  XW  2  Thess.  i.  10.  ggj  I  Cor.  vi,  2. 


836  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Only  those  are  denominated  saints  in  heaven  who  had  been  truly 
such  upon  the  earth  ;  so  that  to  the  times  of  Irenaeus  and  Tertullian 
all  who  were  united  to  Christ  are  known  as  the  liagioi.  And  the 
confessional  writings  lay  strong  emphasis  upon  this  fact,  showing 
how  faithfully  the  Holy  Scriptures  portray  not  only  the  virtues  but 
also  the  mistakes  of  the  saints,  in  order  to  enforce  the  need  of  pru- 
dence in  imitating  their  examples.  Luther  at  one  time  forcibly  in- 
sisted that  the  little  word  ''holy''  was  applied  by  the  sacred  writers 
only  to  the  living  believer  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  that  God  per- 
mitted scarcely  any  great  saint  to  live  faultlessly — as  Moses,  Aaron, 
Miriam,  David — lest  dependence  should  be  placed  in  their  exam- 
ples and  works  to  the  neglect  of  God's  A\'ord.* 

Doubtless  the  Confessors  were  justified  in  their  moderate  and 
carefully  guarded  opinion,  for  the  Roman  Catholic  theory  on  what 
constitutes  saintliness  differs  materially  from  the  Protestant.  Its  de- 
fenders call  those  who  belong  to  the  visible  communion  "the  faith- 
ful," and  those  of  the  invisible  communion  are  "the  saints." 

Beliarmine  is  authority  for  the  generally  adopted  definition  if 
"The  saints  are  the  spirits  of  pious  men  {jLoinimnn)  who  are  released 
from  the  body  and  need  no  purgation,  but  are  already  admitted  into 
the  fruition  of  blessedness  which  consists  in  the  clear  vision  of  God." 
An  analysis  of  this  tenet,  in  the  light  of  the  writings  and  practices 
of  its  advocates,  brings  into  prominence  these  points:  The  saints  are 
the  men  and  women  who  have  professedly  led  Christian  lives  and 
perfectly  fulfilled  the  will  of  God;  who  have  gained  superior  sanctity 
by  works  of  supererogation ;  who,  after,  death,  have  power  to  work 
miracles  through  the  instrumentality  of  their  bones  or  in  answer  to 
the  supplications  of  the  distressed;  and  finally,  who  have  been  can- 
onized or  authoritatively  placed  in  the  ranks  of  saintship.|  It  is  not 
maintained  that  the  Bible  sustains  or  justifies  this  theory.  The 
Council  of  Trent,  in  formulating  and  defining  the  subject  of  invoca- 
tion, did  not  pretend  to  cite  any  testimony  from  Christ  or  his  apostles 
to  designate  those  who  are  to  be  invoked.  The  most  important 
factor  is  canonization.  The  reverence  shown  to  the  uncanonized 
is  far  inferior  to  that  offered  to  the  canonized.  At  first  it  was  the 
people — say  the  Christian  people — who  created  the  saints,  just  as  it 

*Plilt:  Einleitung  in  die  Augustana,  II.,  436, 

fDe  Beatitudine  Sanctorum. 

JComp.  Berger:  Ev.  Glaube,  etc.,  272. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  837 

is  the  people  now  who,  in  their  mysteriously  unconscious  power,  be- 
stow upon  some  favorite  ruler  the  surname  of  the  "  Great "  or  the 
"  Good."  But  nothing  else  could  be  expected  than  that  in  such  an 
act  of  beatification  the  limits  of  human  ingenuity  would  occasionally 
be  reached,  and  some  one  would  attain  to  saintly  preference  whom 
posterity  has  either  forgotten,  or  who,  perhaps,  has  never  lived  at 
all.  The  beautiful  legend  of  St.  Christopher  is  nothing  but  an  alle- 
gory, and  has  no  better  foundation  than  the  pious  wish,  ever  since 
the  days  of  Ignatius,  that  every  Christian  should  be  a  Christopherus 
— a  Christ-bcarcr.  Thus  also  the  legend  of  St.  George  and  the 
dragon  is  a  noble  symbol  of  the  victory  of  Christianity  over  heath- 
enism. Tliese  are  inspiring  e.xamples;  but  the  Flos  Saiictonun  and 
the  Acta  Sanctonnn  of  the  BoUandists  both  teem  with  far  more  sen- 
sational and  legendary  literature.  Yet  they  pretend  to  contain 
only  reliable  history.*  Carpzov  pronounces  the  Vitae  Sanctorum 
"  fabulous." 

Stimulated  by  this  underground  tendency  to  beatify  and  by  the 
literature  growing  out  of  it,  the  monks,  from  very  early  times,  lived 
in  the  highest  expectation  of  becoming  saints;  the  common  people, 
impressed  with  their  lives  of  devotion  and  piety,  silently  accorded 
them  superhuman  honors;  the  bishops,  sympathizing  with  these 
manifestations  of  faithfulness,  reported  the  cases  to  the  pope,  and 
he,  if  satisfied  with  the  life,  manner  of  death  and  works,  would  add 
the  sanction  of  his  authority,  and  the  worship  would  be  no  longer 
confined  to  a  single  community.! 

When  order  and  .system  became  necessary  in  the  classification  of 
the  faithful  who  had  died,  canonization  became  a  prerogative  of  the 
pope.  The  Roman  Curia  had  pronounced  in  individual  cases  as 
earl\'  as  the  loth  century,  but  in  the  1 2th  the  chief  pontiff  began  to 
exercise  as  his  exclusive  right  what  the  reformatory  councils  of  the 
15th  vigorously  but  fruitlessly  attacked.  In  his  jurisdiction  lies  the 
power  to  determine  who  are  worthy  of  reverence  and  adoration. 
Hence,  as  Hase  naively  remarks,  he  has,  as  in  the  case  of  delivery 
from  purgatory,  more  power  in  heaven  than  on  earth.  No  angelic 
or  spiritual  beings  can  prevent  him  from  peopling  the  upper  world 
with  his  own  creatures,  but  the  political  influences  and  national 
prejudices  of  this  world  can  hamper  him  with  limitations,  as  for  in- 

*  Miracles  and  Saints,  60. 

fNeander:  Ecclesiastical  History,  III.,  447. 

54 


838  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

stance,  when  the  opposition  of  the  French  and  Spanish  crowns 
forbade  the  canonizing  of  Bellannine  himself*  This  is  one  of  the 
unfortunate,  but  fatally  consistent  outgrowths  of  that  doctrinal  de- 
velopment whichthe  great  English  Cardinal  has  so  masterfully  sub- 
stituted "for  the  insufficiency  of  scriptural  testimony."  Such  un- 
welcome interferences  go  far  in  discrediting  expedients  which  have 
no  firm  support  in  the  ''pillar  and  ground  of  the  truths  But  they 
who  entrust  themselves  to  the  uncertainties  of  evolution  must  be 
prepared  to  encounter  its  vagaries  and  eccentricities.  There  is  only 
One  who  has  the  right  to  canonize.  "  My  Father  has  given  them 
unto  me."t  "  God  shall  exalt  them."|  "  I  will  give  thee  the  crown 
of  life. "§  Hence  Wickliffe  is  moved  to  say:  "Canonization  by  the 
pope  is  blasphemous,  because,  without  direct  revelation,  no  human 
being  can  be  certain  of  any  one's  future  state."  And  Luther,  who 
is  generally  more  concerned  about  the  execution  of  his  words  than 
their  elegance,  exclaims:  "How  often  may  a  devil  be  esteemed  a 
saint,  and  we  consider  those  saints  who  belong  to  hell."||  He  would 
not  have  changed  his  mind  if  he  had  lived  a  while  longer,  for  is  not 
St.  Raymund  worshiped  as  a  confessor  on  the  ground  of  having  in- 
duced the  King  of  Aragon  to  establish  the  inquisition  in  his  king- 
dom? And  was  not  Pope  Pius  V.  canonized,^  although  his  hands 
were  stained  with  the  blood  of  thousands  of  faithful  disciples  of 
Christ,  and  he  bribed  Rudolfi  to  assassinate  Queen  Elizabeth?** 
Even  Pius  IX.  placed  in  the  ranks  of  saintship  Don  Pedro  Arbues 
after  he  had  burned  hundreds  of  converted  Jews  who  had  been  found 
guilty  of  attachment  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers.  What  possible 
communion  can  there  be  between  these  saints  of  the  Inquisition  and 
the  saints  of  the  New  Testament!  It  is  not  a  difference  in  iime,hut 
spirit.  And  so  radical  a  difference  between  Protestant  and  Catholic, 
as  to  the  characteristic  qualities  of  the  true  saints,  will  go  far  in  de- 
termining what  honor  would  be  accorded  them. 

The  Honor  Accorded  Them  by,  the  Confessors. 
Their  language  is  unmistakable:  "Concerning  the  invocation  of 
the  saints,  our  churches  teach  that  the  saints  may  be  held  in  remem- 

*  Hase  :  Polemik,  301  ei  seq.,  discusses  canonization  fully  and  admirably. 
•j-John  X.  29.  J  James  iv.  10.  |Rev.  ii.  10. 

II  Luther's  Works,  Erlangen  Ed.,  VIII.,  37. 
^Very  few  popes  were  canonized.  **  Jenkins,  199. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  839 

bfance  in  order  that  we  may,  each  in  his  own  calling,  imitate  theif 
faith  and  good  works."  The  German  text  is  a  little  more  specific 
and  conveys  a  few  additional  ideas.*  The  doctrinal  statement, 
though  pronounced  in  its  antagonism  against  worshiping  the  saints, 
is  not  open  to  the  charge  of  disrespect  for  them,  though  Romanists 
have  persistently  put  that  misinterpretation  upon  it.  A  fair  inter- 
pretation of  the  phraseology  will  make  clear  several  salient  points, 
all  of  which  are  rooted  and  grounded  in  the  word  of  Truth. 

1.  The  saints  should  be  held  in  remembrance  because  thereby  the 
honor  and  glory  of  God  will  be  promoted.  The  honor  ascribed  to 
them  is  an  actio  gratiarum  f — an  expression  of  gratitude  to  God,  who 
works  in  his  saints  the  accomplishment  of  his  will  and  supplies  them 
with  an  abundant  measure  of  faith  and  courage.  "The  righteous 
shall  be  had  in  everlasting  remembrance."  |  Melanchthon  §  ampli- 
fies this  sentiment  in  the  Apology:  "The  honoring  is  done  by 
thanking  God  for  showing  us  examples  of  his  grace  in  the  lives  of 
the  saints,  and  for  supplying  the  church  with  teachers  and  other 
gifts.  Now  as  these  gifts  are  great  we  esteem  them,  and  praise  the 
saints  who  made  good  use  of  them,  as  Christ  in  the  Gospel  praised 
the  faithful  servants."  ||  Paul  commends  such  a  remembrance  when 
he  writes  to  the  Galatians  that  those  who  praised  him  without  ever 
having  seen  him  face  to  face  glorified  God  in  hini^  According  to 
some  of  the  best  expositors  of  the  Confession,  this  remembrance 
does  not  necessarily  terminate  in  pronouncing  eulogies  upon  their 
remarkable  virtues  and  achievements,  but  permits  the  use  of  pictures 
and  ipiages  as  an  effectual  means  of  recalling  the  history  of  their 
lives  and  sufferings;  and  it  approves  also  of  festival  days  to  com- 
memorate the  anniversary  of  some  notable  event  in  their  career. 
Luther  says:  "  If  invoking  them  is  abandoned,  pictures  may  be  used 
to  represent  them  to  our  eyes,  just  as  letters  are  used  to  convey 
ideas  to  the  mind."** 

2.  In  preserving  the  remembrance  of  the  saints  we  obtain  confir- 
mation of  our  own  faith.  In  honoring  them  as  monuments  of  God's 
infinite  love  and  mercy  there  is  quickening  and  encouragement  to 

*  Miiller  :  Symbolischcn  Biicher,  47. 

fWalch  :  De  Augustana  Confessione,  329.  X  Ps.  c.\ii.  6. 

gMuller,  223.  II  Matt.  XXV.  21-23.  ^  Gal.  i.  24. 

**The  authority  is  not  that  of  the  Symbols,  but  of  Luther  ;  Guericke,  SymBo- 
lik,  238. 


840  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

our  spiritual  life,  because  they  are  the  practical  examples  of  human 
possibilities  under  the  power  of  divine  grace.  The  Apology  says:* 
"  By  their  example  we  strengthen  our  faith.  Thus,  for  instance,  when 
we  see  that  through  the  rich  grace  of  God  Peter's  sin  was  forgiven 
after  his  denial  of  Christ,  our  hearts  receive  strength  to  believe  that 
grace  abounds  much  more  than  sin.f  The  Scriptures  also  extol 
and  celebrate  the  gifts  of  God  communicated  to  the  samts,  and  praise 
the  saints  themselves  for  having  made  good  use  of  them.  The  com- 
mendation of  the  Baptist  by  the  Saviour;  J  the  eulogy  of  Stephen 
upon  the  Old  Testament  worthies;  §  and  that  grand  epic||  in  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  are  striking  illustrations  of  the  confessional 
teaching.  But  in  according  the  saints  this  honor,  the  Reformers 
were  careful  to  emphasize  the  distinction  between  what  they  called 
the  reverence  of  the  knee  and  the  reverence  of  the  heart.  T[  They 
agree  with  Augustine  in  saying:  "We  honor  the  memories  of  the 
martyrs,  in  order  that  by  that  celebration  we  may  both  render 
thanks  to  God  for  their  victories  and  encourage  ourselves  to  the 
emulation  of  their  crowns  and  palms."** 

3.  The  saints  should  be  held  in  remembrance  by  imitating  the 
examples  they  left  the  world  while  living.  "  Remember  them  that 
had  the  rule  over  you,  which  spake  unto  you  the  word  of  God;  and 
considering  the  issue  of  their  life,  imitate  their  faith." ft  The  lan- 
guage of  the  Confession,  amended  by  that  of  the  Apology,  gives  a 
clear  conception  of  the  teaching:  "We  honor  them  by  following 
their  faith,  love  and  patience,  each  one  in  his  own  calling."  As  an 
illustration  there  is  cited  the  case  of  the  Emperor  studying,  jn  his 
preparations  for  the  conflict  with  the  Turks,  the  example  of  David 
as  a  model  of  imperial  wisdom  and  courage.  The  apostolic  fathers 
— notably  St.  Clement — called  attention  to  this  idea.  In  his  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians  he  writes:  "  Let  us  steadfastly  contemplate  those 
who  have  perfectly  ministered  to  his  excellent  glory — Enoch  for  his 
obedience,  Noah  for  his  faithfulness,  Elijah  for  his  humility. "|J  To 
these  can  be  added  the  piety  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,  Hannah's 
attachment  to  the  house  of  the  Lord,  the  unwearying  fidelity  of  St. 

*  Mueller:  Apologia,  223.  f  Rom.  v.  20. 

I  Matt.  xi.  4.  g  Acts  vii.  5.  ||  Heb.  xi. 

If  Chemnitz,  Examen  Concilii  Tridentini,  Pt.  III.,  Cap.  3,  Sec.  i. 
**  City  of  God,  Chap.  8.  ft  Heb.  xiii.  7.     Mueller,  Sym.  Biich.,  224. 

JJThe  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  Vol.  I.,  7. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  84I 

Paul,  Stephen's  steadfastness  in  the  faith,  and  the  love  of  St.  John 
for  his  fellow-man.  Melanchthon  stoutly  insisted  that  saintly  in- 
tercession consisted  in  "the  living  saints  praying  for  one  another," 
and  Hildebert  of  Tours,  who  represented  the  spiritual  Christianity 
of  the  twelfth  century,  says:  "The  only  genuinely  Christian  element 
lying  at  the  foundation  of  true  saint-worship  is:  Love  among  them 
in  life.*  Remembering  f  the  bonds  of  the  saints,  ministering  J  to 
their  necessities,  holding  collections  §  for  their  benefit,  emulating 
one  another  in  showing  them  preference  of  place, ||  bearing  their 
burdens^ — this  is  the  Christlike  and  apostolic  manner  of  doing 
them  reverence;  or  in  the  words  of  Luther,**  "the  right  spiritual 
exaltation  and  honor  belonging  to  the  saints."  Thus  also  pleads 
truthful  Cassanderft — the  amiable  and  enlightened  Roman  Catholic 
divine — in  his  Consiiltatio  to  harmonize  the  Augsburg  Confession 
with  the  faith  of  the  Romish  Church:  ''These  are  the  true  relics  of 
the  saints,  which  must  be  imitated  by  the  faithful,  namely  the  ex- 
amples of  their  godliness  and  virtues,  as  found  in  their  writings  and 
their  lives."  We  are  reminded  here  of  the  beautiful  saying  of 
Agobard,  of  Lyons :  "  Better  copy  the  works  of  the  living  saints 
than  invoke  the  intercession  of  the  dead  saints." 

That  a  remembrance  of  the  saints  such  as  is  authorized  and  en- 
couraged by  a  correct  understanding  of  the  Confession,  should  be 
more  faithfully  advocated  and  observed,  goes  without  saying.  It 
will  not  involve  Protestant  Christendom  in  any  superstitious  prac- 
tices. Why  should  we  hesitate  to  pronounce  eulogies  over  the 
righteous  and  noble  souls  whose  faithfulness  has  added  so  much  to 
the  moral  refitting  of  this  globe  ?  To  be  unappreciative  of  the  saints 
on  earth,  to  withhold  from  them  recognition  for  their  instrumentality 
in  carrying  forward  God's  purposes  of  salvation,  to  ignore  them  as 
exemplars  of  a  godly  life  while  present  here,  usually  presages  an 
excessive  adulation  and  superstitious  veneration  for  them  after  their 
death.  How  natural  that  is,  too!  Men  of  high  religious  aspirations, 
who  have  labored  for  the  revival  or  reformation  of  religion — after 
having  received  ridicule  and  persecution  on  all  sides  except  from  a 
small  body  of  homage-bearing  disciples — have  been  apotheosized 
and  worshiped  as  virtual  deities  after  death.     On  the  other  hand,  a 

*  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.  t  2  Tim.  i.  5.  J  2  Cor.  ix.  i. 

§  I  Cor.  xvi.  I.  II  Rom.  xii.  10.  If  Gal.  vi.  2. 

**  Works,  Erlangen,  xxiv.,  249.      ft  Jenkins:  Romanism  of  Pius  IV.,  215. 


342  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

remembrance  founded  in  the  truths  of  God's  teachings  interpene- 
trates the  heart  with  that  spirit  which  humanizes  all  sensibility  and 
fixes  the  instinct  of  adoration  upon  God.  It  has  been  the  universal 
experience  of  the  best  men  that  the  closer  one's  communion  with 
Christ,  the  intenser  will  be  the  feeling  toward  all  true  believers — not 
to  worship  them  after  death,  but  to  associate  with  them  in  life — for 
the  consciousness  of  true  religion,  the  real,  living  consciousness  is, 
fpr  one  thing,  the  power  of  God  working  in  the  soul  a  longing  after 
communion  with  the  saints.  In  such  a  feeling  of  veneration  for 
them  there  is  a  most  salutary  fascination.  How  natural  that  the  eye 
should  follow  into  the  upper  world  the  noble  souls  who  were  our 
friends  in  adversity,  or  who  had  been  instrumental  in  our  advance- 
ments— the  old  pastors,  the  beloved  teachers  of  our  childhood  and 
early  youth,  the  revered  preceptors  of  our  maturer  years!  Even 
though  we  do  not  direct  our  petitions  to  them,  "  they  sometimes 
seem  to  be  flesh  again  ;  they  breathe  upon  us  with  warm  breath  ; 
they  touch  us  with  soft  responsive  hands  ;  they  look  at  us  with  sad 
$incere  e3'es,  and  speak  to  us  in  appealing  tones  ;  they  seem  to  be 
reclothed  in  living  human  reality,  with  all  its  conflicts,  its  faith  and 
its  love.  Then  their  presence  is  a  power,  then  they  shake  us  like  a 
passion  and  we  are  drawn  after  them  with  gentle  compulsion,  as 
flame  is  drawn  to  flame."*  There  is  an  instinctive  out-reaching  for 
their  presence  and  helpfulness.  Was  it  not  Tintoretto  who  in  paint- 
ing a  head  of  the  Christ,  filled  up  the  background  of  his  picture  with 
the  infinitesimal  heads  of  saints,  so  that  their  watchful  eyes  might 
keep  him  from  dealing  irreverently  with  the  sacred  theme  ?  What 
wonder  that  Luther  once  saidrf  "  It  was  an  incalculably  bitter  thing 
for  me  to  break  loose  from  the  veneration  of  the  saints ;  I  was  pro- 
foundly absorbed  in  it  and  completely  saturated  with  its  influence." 
It  was  not  only  for  the  sake  of  peace,  but  from  a  spirit  of  pious  re- 
gard for  all  believers,  that  the  early  Reformers  made  all  possible 
concession  on  this  vital  question  of  dispute.  The  Augsburg  In- 
terim Article  XXIV. J  may  have  been  somewhat  too  conciliatory  in 
the  interests  of  genuine  conservatism  :  "  On  the  remembrance  of  the 
saints  we  hold  that  they  pray  to  God  for  us  and  help  us  with  their 
service."  Ground  somewhat  similar  to  this  was  taken  by  the  Leipsic 
Interim.     Even  Melanchthon  concedes  that  the  Augsburg  Confes- 

*  George  Eliot  never  wrote  a  tenderer  sentence. 

t  Works,  Erlangen,  Iv.,  120.  J  Herzog,  i.,  612. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  843 

sion  itself  may  leave  a  loop-hole  to  suppose  that  the  saints  in  heaven 
may  pray  for  the  church  in  general,  in  gciiere,  with  the  qualifying 
remark,  however,  that  such  a  notion  has  no  stronger  testimony  in 
the  word  of  God  than  the  dream  of  the  great  Maccabean  general.* 

So  then  it  is  at  least  an  error  of  judgment  on  the  part  of  Cardinal 
Gibbons  f  when  he  claims  "  that  the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, in  denying  the  communion  of  saints,  not  only  inflicted  a  deadly 
wound  on  the  Creed,  but  also  severed  the  tenderest  cords  of  the  hu- 
man heart.  They  broke  asunder  the  holy  ties  that  united  earth  with 
heaven,  and  the  soul  in  the  flesh  with  the  soul  released  from  the 
flesh."  The  indignant  answer  of  Chemnitz  J  to  this  long-exploded 
charge  may  suffice:  "  It  is  false  that  we  dishonor  the  saints  or  allow 
them  insufficient  regard,  as  if  their  remembrance  were  not  to  be  cele- 
brated. But  our  complaint  is  against  the  papal  church,  because 
she  neither  retains,  fosters,  nor  demands  the  honor  of  the  saints  as 
defended  in  the  word  of  God,  but  obscures,  perverts,  and  destroys 
it." 

And  this  is  not  only  the  teaching  of  the  Confession  itself,  but  of 
all  its  expositors  and  apologists.  The  Church  can  safely  afford  to 
stand  by  the  interpretation.  Walch  §  gives  a  list  of  authorities  to 
show  that  the  Augustana  does  not  stand  alone  on  this  doctrinal  plat- 
form. It  is  the  general  doctrine  of  Protestantism,  the  catena  of 
sound  scriptural  teaching,  the  couscfisus  doctoriivi  of  Evangelicalism, f] 
that  the  saints  should  be  held  in  remembrance  because  thereby  {a) 
God  is  honored,  {b)  our  faith  confirmed,  [c)  and  their  lives  ennobled. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Dogma. 

But  the  foregoing  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the  papal  church.  The 
Confession's  remembrance  of  the  saints  is  entirely  inadequate  in 
the  estimation  of  Roman  Catholic  theologians.  It  did  not  satisfy 
the  Confutators  even  proximately.  Whilst  they  agreed  to  ten  arti- 
cles of  the  Augustana,  disputed  the  doctrinal  tendency  of  seven,  and 
partially  condemned  three,  this  one  they  rejected  in  toto — siniplicitcr 
davDiant,  as  Melanchthon  sententiously  observes.  With  them  the 
Cultus  Sanctorum   was  not  a  question   of  honoring   the  saints   but 

*2  Mac.  ii.  14,  15.  t  Faith  of  our  Fathers,  190. 

t  Examen,  Ft.  III.,  Sec.  i.  \\n  Libros  Ecc.  Luih.  Sym.,  Cap.  1 1 1,  329. 

II  See  also  Guericke:  Christliche  Symbolik,  235;  and  Winer:  Confessions  of 
Christendom,  68  f. 


844  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

worshiping  them,  not  of  remembrance  but  veneration,  not  of  com- 
mendation but  adoration.  They  would  not  agree,  says  Walch,  to 
the  most  reasonable  concessions  or  conservative  limitations.  Titt- 
man  argues  that  they  were  compelled  to  take  this  stand  or  abandon 
their  church.  Plitt  affirms  that  Eck  charged  against  the  evangeli- 
cals sixteeen  errors  with  Regard  to  the  saints,  and  would  not  listen 
to  the  mention  of  a  reconciliation.  A  glance  at  the  subject  as  eluci- 
dated and  defended  by  such  profound  thinkers  of  to-day  as  Cardinal 
Newman,  the  editors  of  the  Dublin  Review,  Cardinal  Gibbons,  forces 
any  one  to  the  conclusion  that  if  this  dogma  were  yielded  by  Ro- 
manists, the  strongest  link  in  the  chain  of  their  teaching  would  be 
broken.  "  The  profoundest  of  the  causes  which  separate  the 
Churches  lies  in  the  Mariolatry  and  saint-worship  of  Rome;  while 
most  of  the  other  controversies  involve  only  the  means  and  appli- 
ances of  worship,  this  relates  to  the  very  object  and  end  of  it."* 
The  question  whether  the  saints  should  be  religiously  invoked  and 
adored,  they  settle  with  the  most  positive  and  irreversible  affirmative. 
I.  The  Coinicil  of  Trent, \  in  its  twenty-fifth  session,  December, 
1563,  formulated  the  floating  theories  and  opinions  as  follows:  "On 
the  invocation  of  saints,  the  holy  synod  enjoins  on  all  bishops  and 
others  who  sustain  the  office  and  charge  of  teaching,  that,  agreeably 
to  the  usage  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  received  from 
ithe  primitive  times  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  agreeably  to  the 
consent  of  the  holy  fathers  and  the  decrees  of  the  sacred  councils 
*  *  *  they  especially  instruct  the  faithful  concerning  the  invocation 
and  intercession  of  the  saints  ;  the  honor  paid  to  relics ;  and  the  legiti- 
mate use  of  images;  teaching  them,  that  the  saints,  who  reign  to- 
gether with  Christ,  offer  up  their  own  prayers  to  God  for  men;  that 
it  is  good  and  useful  suppliantly  to  invoke  them,  and  to  have  re- 
course to  their  prayers,  aid  and  help  for  obtaining  benefits  from  God 
through  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  who  is  our  alone  Redeemer 
and  Saviour;  but  that  they  think  impiously  who  deny  that  the  saints 
who  enjoy  eternal  happiness  in  heaven,  are  to  be  invocated;  or  who 
assert  either  that  they  do  not  pray  for  men  ;  or  that  the  invocation 
of  them  to  pray  for  each  of  us  in  particular  is  idolatry  ;  or  that  it  is 
repugnant  to  the  word  of  God,  and  is  opposed  to  the  honor  of  the 
one  Mediator  of  God  and  men,  Clirist  fcsits;  or  that  it  is  foolish  to 
supplicate,  vocally  or  mentally,  those  who  reign  in  heaven." 

*  Jenkins  :   Romanism  of  Pius  IV.,  189. 
fSchaff:  Creeds  of  Christendom,  Vol.  II.,  199. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  845 

It  Will  be  noticed  here  that  the  assistance  of  the  saints  is  a  theory, 
not  founded  on  the  Bible,  but  on  their  imagined  co-regency  with 
Christ — una  cum  CJiristo  regno tcs — and  intercessory  rights;  and 
their  invocation  is  "  good  and  useful  "  rather  than  necessary  and  in- 
dispensable. In  so  far  the  Tridentine  deliverance  differs  from  the 
Greek  Confession*  of  Peter  Mogila.f  who  pronounces  prayer  to  the 
saints  a  cJircos — necessity,  and  makes  Mary  and  the  other  saints  a 
mcsetcia — mediation  with  God. 

2.  We  are,  however,  not  limited  to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  for  a  knowledge  of  the  papistical  understanding  of  this  system. 
It  receives  ample  elucidation  in  the  devotional  and  educational 
books  authorized  by  the  Church.  In  the  Psalter  of  BonavcnturaX 
for  instance,  we  find  characteristic  improvements  on  some  of  the 
Psalms.  On  the  I  Psalm:  "Blessed  they  who  love  thy  name,  O 
Virgin  Mary!"  On  the  vii :  "O  most  excellent  lady,  in  thee  do  I 
put  my  trust."  On  the  xix  :  "  The  heavens  declare  thy  glory,  O 
Virgin  Mary."  On  the  ex:  "The  Lord  said  unto  my  most  excel- 
lent lady:  My  mother,  sit  thou  on  my  right  hand,  until  I  make  thine 
enemies  thy  foot-stool."  These  are  a  iftw  specimens  from  an  abun- 
dant mass  of  similar  supplicatory  addresses.  The  CatecJiisinus  Con- 
cilia Tridentini,  the  primer  of  religious  instruction  for  the  youths  of 
the  Romish  communion,  ascribes  divine  worship  to  the  angels  and 
apostles. §  The  Breviary  which  was  prepared  under  a  decree  of  the 
Council  of  I'rent  and  sanctioned  by  numerous  papal  ordinances, 
though  full  of  legends,  if  not  offensive  to  good  taste,  morals  and 
sense,  nevertheless  unprofitable, ||  yet  acknowledged  with  praise  by 
Dr.  Newman,T[  contains  a  prayer**  which  ascribes  equal  honor  to  the 
saints  with  the  Father  and  the  Son.  In  the  Utavy  of  the  Saints,\'\  as 
found  in  one  of  the  latest  missals,  there  is  an  ora  pro  nobis  for  fifty- 


*Guericke:  Christliche  Symbolik,  244. 

fThe  symbolic  book  of  the  Eastern  Church. 

J  Chemnitz,  without  passing  judgment  on  its  merits,  gives  the  most  complete 
synopsis  of  this  book  to  be  found.     See  Examen  :   Pt.  III.,  Sec.  2. 

^  Leipsic  Edition,  1851. 

II  Miracles  and  Saints,  79.  T|  Development  of  Christian  Doctrine,  411. 

**Sacrosanctae  et  individuae  Trinitati,  crucifixi  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi 
humanitati,  beatissimae  et  gloriosissimae  semperque  Virginis  Mariae  foecundae 
integritati  et  omnium  sanctorum  uniyersitati,  sit  sempiterna  laus,  honor,  virtus 
et  gloria  ab  omni  creatura. 

ffCathcart:  The  Papal  System,  309. 


846  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

one  saints  with  specified  names  from  St.  Michael  to  Santa  Anastasia, 
besides  all  the  holy  angels  and  archangels,  patriarchs  and  prophets, 
holy  apostles  and  evangelists,  holy  innocents,  bishops,  confessors, 
monks  and  hermits,  all  of  whom  are  invited  to  be  mediators  with 
God  even  though  the  Vulgate  itself  says:  "There  is  07ie  mediator 
of  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus."  A  Litany  of  the  twelfth 
and  thirteenth  centuries  contains  similar  ascriptions — a  notable  one 
to  St.  Laurentius:  "O  thou  who  wast  roasted  alive,  come,  bring 
consolation  to  us  miserable  ones."* 

3.  These  expressions  are  not  repudiated,  but  defended  by  the 
highest  authorities  in  the  Church  of  Rome.  Pope  Pius  IV. f  says: 
"  I  believe  likewise  that  the  saints  reigning  together  with  Christ  are 
to  be  honored  and  invocated."  Alphonso  Liguori,J  who  was  him- 
self canonized  by  Pope  Gregory  XVI.,  invoked  the  Virgin  Mary  as 
queen  of  heaven:  "Save  me,  O  powerful  queen,  save  me  by  the  in- 
tercession of  thy  Son."  Gregory  XVI.  closes  a  letter :§  "Let  us 
raise  our  eyes  to  the  most  blessed  Virgin  Mary  *  *  who  is  our 
greatest  hope,  yea,  the  entire  ground  of  our  hope."  Cardinal  New- 
man,||  interpreting  saint-worship  as  the  central  doctrine  of  Athana- 
sius,  says:  "The  sanctification  or  rather  deification  of  the  nature  of 
man  is  the  main  subject  of  his  theology."  And  in  his  exposition  of 
Father  Segneri's  theology  he  acquiesces  in  the  opinion  that  "all  the 
saints  have  participated  sonship,  divinity,  glory,  holiness  and  wor- 
ship."! 

4.  A  few  instances  of  the  practical  working  of  the  system  will 
demonstrate  how  tenaciously  it  has  taken  hold  of  the  minds  of  its 
advocates  and  how  deeply  it  is  rooted  in  their  religious  instincts. 
A  refusal  to  adopt  it  incurs  at  least  the  suspicion  of  heresy.  The 
Church  condemns  all  who  in  any  wise  hesitate  to  accept  the  decree 
of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Pope**  Benedict  XIV.  intimates  that  dis- 
paraging the  worship  of  saints  is,  if  not  a  positive  heresy,  at  least  a 
sin  of  unbelief,  and  further  says,  "  that  whosoever  shall  dare  to  assert 
that  the  pope  has  erred  in  this  or  that  canonization,  brings  scandal 
upon  the  whole  church,  is  a  maintainer  of  an  erroneous  proposition 
and  deserving  of  the  severest  punishment."  That  these  covered 
threats  of  excommunication  are  carefully  remembered  by  the  laity 

*Vilmar:  Geschichte  der  Deutschen  National  Literatura,  578. 

t  Cuming,  297.  J  Ibid,  299.  |  Ibid,  301.  ||  Development,  140. 

\  Ibid,  435.  **  Mediaeval  and  Modern  Miracles  and  Saints,  74. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  847 

is  manifest  from  the  universal  silence  in  regard  to  the  most  offensive 
superstitions.  Some  of  the  most  conciliatory  writers  feign  to  dis- 
claim them,  but  no  one  ventures  now  to  discountenance  them.  In 
truth,  the  Romish  Party  in  their  Confutation  of  this  21st  Article  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession — 1530 — take  pleasure  in  showing  that  the 
Albigenses,  Picards,  and  other  heretics,  new  and  old,  were  deserv- 
edly condemned  for  their  opposition  to  worshiping  the  saints.  Even 
Cardinal  Gibbons*  goes  no  farther  than  to  say  :  "  There  are  expres- 
sions addressed  to  the  saints  in  popular  books  of  devotion,  which, 
to  critical  readers,  may  seem  extravagant.  But  they  are  only  the 
warm  language  of  affection  and  poetry,  and  are  to  be  regulated  by 
our  standard  of  faith."  But  what  care  the  devout  Calabrian  and 
Sicilian  assassins  and  robbers  for  the  "  standard  of  the  faith  ?"  They 
join  the  honest  peasantry  and  artisans  who  flock  around  the  shrine 
of  an  imaginary  saint,  and  bother  little  about  the  sophistical  distinc- 
tions of  theorizing  ecclesiastics.  As  late  as  1872  a  pilgrimage,  com- 
prising in  its  successive  divisions  two  hundred  thousand  people,  was 
organized  in  France  to  do  homage  to  St.  Philomena,  "  the  thauma- 
turgist  of  the  nineteenth  century,"  and  to  the  virgin  of  La  Salette, 
and  this  by  sanction  of  Pio  Nono  and  the  secret  connivance  of  the 
French  government. f 

Gathering  information  from  all  available  sources,  viewing  Roman 
Catholic  teaching  on  all  sides,  confining  ourselves  to  its  own  author- 
ities, yet  remaining  within  the  bounds  of  fairness  and  justice  to  a 
church  numbering  so  many  millions,  to  which  our  confessors  at  one 
time  belonged,  we  come  to  the  following  summary  of  its  faith  on  the 
invocation  of  saints  : 

1.  The  saints  who  have  departed  from  this  life  are  to  be  relig- 
iously invoked  in  calamity,  addressed  in  prayer,  and  worshiped  in 
the  conviction  of  their  intercessory  power.  "  Roman  Catholics  do 
not  honor  the  saints  with  that  worship  only  wherewith  we  do  men 
which  excel  in  virtue,  etc.,  but  also  with  divine  worship  and  honor, 
which  is  an  act  of  xc\\^\o\\!' —Bellarmitie .\ 

2.  Of  this  adoration  the  saints  are  worthy  because  by  their  works 
of  supererogation  and  superfluous  merits  they  supplement  our  de- 
fectiveness, stand  between  the  divine  righteousness  and  human 
unworthiness,  and   mitigate  the  severity  of  the   one   intercessor  in 


*  Faith  of  our  Fathers,  182.  f  Mir.  and  Saints,  i  59. 

\  Quoted  by  Pusey  in  Eirenicon,  107. 


848  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

order  that  we  may  become  participants  in  the  promises  of  God. 
"  Because  we  beheve  in  the  communion  of  saints,  therefore  we  hold 
communion  with  them  in  prayer,  and  because  we  pray  to  them  they 
carry  our  prayers  to  God." — Cardinal  Gibbons.'^ 

3.  To  this  end  all  the  faithful  are  admonished  to  an  unwavering 
confidence  that  the  beatified  in  heaven  see,  know,  hear  and  under- 
stand all  the  special  wishes  of  individuals  and  the  silent  thoughts 
of  the  spirit,  are  near  at  hand  in  every  moment  and  able  to  answer 
every  petition.  "  Just  as  the  mass  and  indulgences  work  for  the 
good  of  the  dead,  so  the  saints  through  their  intercessions  work  for 
the  best  of  the  living.  They  are  in  a  similar  way  the  mediators  in 
heaven  as  the  priests  are  upon  the  earth." — Thomas  Aqjiiiias.^ 

With  this  doctrine  of  saint-worship  in  Latin  Christianity,  agrees 
that  of  the  Oriental  church.  The  Greeks  invoke  the  Virgin  Mary 
as  the  mother  of  God,  the  saints  and  martyrs  as  sub-mediators,  the 
angels  as  protectors  and  defenders,  and  venerate  relics  and  images 
as  intermediate  instrumentalities  in  the  worship  of  the  Trinity.J  On 
minor  points  there  is  some  slight  diversity,  but  the  essential  features 
are  similar.  At  the  Council  of  Florence  the  Roman  Church  was 
willing  to  receive  the  whole  body  of  Eastern  canonized  saints. 

The  Origin  of  Saint  Worship. 

How  did  the  invocation  of  the  saints  originate?  A  historical  in- 
quiry, so  far  as  we  have  access  to  the  most  authentic  sources  of  an- 
tiquity, invests  the  subject  with  additional  interest  and  exhibits  its 
tendencies  in  clearer  light. 

In  the  Old  Testament  it  is  unknown.  Said  an  eminent  Rabbi  in 
a  recent  sermon:  "Israel  has  never  forgotten  its  noble  heroes,  nor 
its  martyrs.  It  has  paid  them  their  tribute  of  tears  and  mourns 
them  still;  but  it  never  made  saints  of  them;  it  never  worshiped 
them;  never  preserved  their  relics  and  worked  miracles  with  them." 
"  The  Hebrews  §  were  allowed  to  pass  to  heaven,  or  purgatory,  with- 
out any  apotheosis  or  beatification."  The  young  King  Hezekiah 
quickly  "  brake  in  pieces  the  brazen  serpent  of  Moses, "||  contemptu- 
ously calling  it  "nehushtan,"  when  he  noticed   the  growing  signs  of 

*  Condensed  from  Faith  of  our  Fathers,  181. 

fHerzog:   Encyklopsedia,  xvi.,  71. 

X  Guericke  :  SymboHk  gives  the  original,  244. 

I  Edgar ;  Variations  of  Popery,  462.  ||  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  849 

idolatry  among  the  people.  Like  Leo  and  Constantine  and  Theo- 
philus.he  would  shatter  into  fragments  anything  that  detracted  from 
the  supreme  honor  of  God.  The  religion  of  the  true  Hebrew  was 
founded  on  one  grand  declaration:  "  Hear,  O  Israel,*  The  Lord  our 
God  is  one  Lord.  And  thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God  and 
him  only  shalt  thou  serve."t  This,  according  to  Origen's  reply  to 
Celsus,  excluded  likewise  angel-worship.  After  quoting  the  first 
commandment  he  says :  "  No  one  who  obeys  the  law  of  Moses 
will  bow  down  to  the  angels  who  are  in  heaven.";]: 

The  best  and  most  ancient  authorities  §  maintain  that  the  early 
Christians  were  strangers  to  saint-worship — ab  invocatione  sanc- 
torum alieni.  Chemnitz  ||  calmly  and  boldly  affirms  that  in  the  best 
and  purest  times  of  the  Church,  i.  e.,  of  Christ  and  his  apostles — 
yea,  even  in  post-apostolic  times — the  invocation  of  saints  is  utterly 
unknown — prorsns  ignota.  With  this  statement  corresponds  the 
universal  testimony  of  reliable  Church  history.  In  the  first  and 
second  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  it  was  perfectly  natural  that  the 
memory  of  those  believers,  who  had  lost  their  lives  in  the  persecu- 
tions on  account  of  faith  in  the  Christ,  should  be  gratefully  revered. 
The  anniversary  of  their  martyrdom  was  called  their  birthday,  and 
was  celebrated  sometimes  with  enthusiastic  fervency.  The  people^ 
assembled  at  the  tombs  of  these  martyrs  to  offer  prayers  to  God  and 
excite  themselves  to  faith  and  patience  by  the  solemn  recollection  of 
their  virtues.  Narratives  of  their  confessions  and  sufferings  would 
be  read,  the  Lord's  Supper  would  be  frequently  celebrated  in  com- 
memoration of  communion  with  the  departed  and  the  consciousness 
that  they  were  resting  from  their  labors  and  receiving  their  rewards 
in  a  conscious  and  continuous  life  with  God.  These  observances, 
or  oblatioiics,  sacrificia  pro  martyribus,  originally  presupposed  that 
the  martyrs  were  like  all  other  fallible,  sinful  human  beings,  and  not 
entitled  to  any  superhuman  or  celestial  honors.  That  there  was  not 
the  least  shadow  of  intercession,  or  invocation,  or  worship,  we  gather 
from  a  description  of  Polycarp's  martyrdom**  in  the  middle  of  the 

*  Deut.  vi.  4.  t  Matt.  iv.  10.  %  Ante  Nicene  Fathers,  IV.,  545. 

?Wy.lch  mentions  in  his  Inlrod)ictio  in  Libros  Ecc.  Lui/wratiae  SjiiiboL  as 
valuable  :  Chamierus  in  Panstrat.  Catholic,  torn  II.,  lib.  20,  cap.  7,  409. 
Beblius  :  Antiq.  Ecc.  Secul,  torn  III.,  Art.  7,  980. 

II  Examen  Cone.  Tri.,  Pt.  3,  398.  ^[Guericke;  ChristlicheSynibolik,  231. 

**  Neander  :  I.,  596. 


850  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

second  century.  In  their  report  the  congregation  at  Smyrna  say: 
"  Be  it  known  that  b)/  honoring  the  departed  we  neither  leave  our 
Saviour  nor  worship  any  one  else,  but  love  the  martyrs  as  they 
deserve  for  their  unsurpassable  love  to  their  associates  and  fellow 
disciples."  Of  which  touching  and  most  important  account  Chem- 
nitz remarks  with  positiveness,  that  it  remains  uncontradicted  by 
any  ecclesiastical  information  from  those  earliest  times.* 

Then.f  as  the  consciousness  of  lukewarmness  and  growing  world- 
liness  became  more  and  more  a  reality  in  the  Christian  experi- 
ence of  the  second  and  third  centuries,  there  arose  a  longing 
among  the  most  faithful,  after  the  piety  and  godly  character  of  those 
who  had  died  for  their  testimony  to  the  faith.  The  more  people 
declined  in  religious  fervency,  the  more  they  began  to  revere  those 
who  had  been  so  far  superior  to  them.  Their  memories  would  not 
only  be  privately  treasured,  but  transmitted  to  others.  Memorials 
of  them  would  be  tenderly  preserved;!  their  tombs  would  assume 
the  nature  of  sanctity;  their  martyrdom  would  become  more  and 
more  the  season  for  popular  celebration;  the  saints'  days  would 
become  holidays.  Thoughts  upon  thoughts  in  this  line  of  medita- 
tion would  follow:  having  prayed  for  their  fellows  in  life,  it  was 
unnatural  that  these  departed  would  cease  doing  so  after  death. 
Their  prayers  had  been  intercessory  in  this  world,  why  should  they 
not  be  so  in  the  next  ?  Cyprian  went  so  far  as  to  ask  the  living  to 
continue  their  intercessions  for  him  after  they  had  entered  into  their 
rest.§  Nevertheless  there  is  not  yet  the  least  manifestation  of  an 
invocation  such  as  the  papal  dogma  demands.  The  most  rhetorical 
panegyrics  were  no  more  than  rhetoric.  Even  the  most  pronounced 
opinions  were  only  individual  and  private,  and  not  the  public  or 
authoritative  deliverance  of  the  Church.  Not  the  least  sign  of 
Mariolatry  had  yet  appeared.  Pusey  shows  that  the  story  of  Justina 
"  beseeching  the  mother  of  Christ  to  succor  a  virgin  in  peril  from 
the  assaults  of  Satan"  is  without  foundation. ||  And  in  the  "Acts  of 
the  Martyrs"  there  is  not  one  genuine  instance  where  any  of  those 
terribly  persecuted  confessors  of  Jesus  asked  help  amidst  their 
superhuman  sufferings  except  from  God,  or  our  Lord.  The  self- 
confident  appeals  to  what  the  advocates  of  saint- worship  call  "patristic 

*Examen,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5.  t  Kurtz  :  Church  History,  I.,  221. 

JMozley:  Theory  of  Development,  25. 

^  Chemnitz  ;  Examen,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5.  |]  Eirenicon,  108. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  85 1 

testimony"  for  its  justification,  have  no  better  foundation  than  the 
traditional  and  legendary  accounts  of  impossible  and  improbable 
saints.*  Jerome,  whose  angry  opposition  to  Vigilantius  is  univers- 
ally cited  as  an  insuperable  defense  of  the  invocation  of  saints,  has 
not  a  syllable  about  invocation,  but  simply  speaks  of  honoring  them.f 
Even  Origen  admits  that  if  the  saints  in  heaven  do  anything  for  us, 
it  is  included  in  the  divine  secrets  and  not  recorded  in  human 
transactions ;  even  if  they  do  pray  for  us,  that  is  no  reason  why  we 
should  invoke  them;  and  in  his  controversy  with  Celsus  he  flings 
the  impassioned  rebuke  into  the  face  of  this  arch-enem\-  of  Christ: 
"  We  must  offer  adoration  to  God  alone."  | 

And  \'et  it  is  he  who  sowed  the  first  seeds  of  what  afterwards 
ripened  into  one  of  the  most  popular  and  tenaciously  supported  of 
papal  practices.  Thoroughly  imbued  with  Platonism§  he  believed 
as  implicitly  as  any  of  the  disciples  of  the  great  philosopher,  that 
the  souls  of  good  and  virtuous  men,  after  the  decease  of  the  body, 
are  turned  into  angels  or  good  demons,  and  fly  about  the  world 
helping  men  and  defending  them  from  evils  and  mishaps.  It  was 
an  easy  matter  to  transfer  this  apparently  innocent  belief,  with  un- 
important modifications,  to  the  souls  of  the  saints,  and  make  the 
philosophy  of  Plato  an  integral  portion  of  the  religion  of  Jesus. 
But  that  which  won  the  approbation  of  educated  heathenism  for  the 
time,  de\'eloped  in  the  next  century  into  opinions  which  threatened 
to  destroy  the  knowledge  of  Christ. 

The  first  unmistakable  manifestations  of  saint-worship  in  its 
modern  signification  appear  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century.  ||  It 
then  became  customary  to  address  formal  and  personal  appeals  to 
the  departed,  both  in  prayer  and  the  orations  on  festival  days.  Basil, 
bishop  of  Caesarea,  A.  D.  370,  stands  foremost  in  practically  appeal- 
ing to  the  dead.  In  a  eulogy  pronounced  over  the  martyrdom  of 
forty  soldiers  by  Julian  the  apostate,  he  suddenly  broke  forth  :  "  O 
ye  united  defenders  of  the  human  family;  ye  exalted  companions  of 
suffering;  ye  fellow  associates  in  prayer  ;  ye  mighty  helpers  !"^  But 
the  Gregories  quickly  surpassed  him  in  their  declamatory  eulogies. 

*  See  Vitae  Patruw,  a  book  characterized  by  Mr.  Lecky  in  a  note  to  the 
fourth  chapter  of  his  "  History  of  European  Morals"  as  "one  of  the  most  fas- 
cinating volumes  in  the  whole  range  of  literature." 

f  Melanchthon  in  Apology,  223,         J  Chemnitz  :  Ex.,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5. 

\  South  :  Vol.  n.,  496.  II  Chemnitz  :  Examen,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5. 

\  Bossuet-Cramer  :  Einleitung. 


852  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Nazianzen  declares  of  Basil :  "  Now  he  is  in  heaven  ;  now  he  sacri- 
fices for  us;  now  he  prays  for  the  people;"  and  the  dead  Athanasius 
he  addressed:  "But  do  thou  look  in  mercy  upon  us  from  thy  lofty 
dwelling  place!"  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  in  paying  a  eulogistic  tribute 
to  the  martyr  Theodore,  cries  out :  "  O  blessed  one,  we  implore  thee 
to  intercede  for  our  Fatherland!"* 

These  are  some  of  the  causes  which  lie  at  the  root  of  saint  wor- 
ship— namely,  the  natural  devotion  to  the  memory  of  the  martyrs 
— the  deep  longing  in  times  of  religious  decadence  after  their  won- 
derful attainments — the  subtle  influence  of  the  Platonic  philosophy 
on  the  educated  mind,  and  the  growing  power  of  superstition  upon 
the  masses.  And  it  is  of  supreme  significance  that  invocation  did 
not  obtain  full  sway  until  after  the  death  of  the  church  fathers. 
They  lived  before  the  darkness  of  the  middle  ages  obscured  the  pure 
spiritual  life.  Chemnitz  sorrowfully  laments  that  opposition  to  it 
ceased  as  the  light  of  instruction  expired  and  the  night  of  supersti- 
tion culminated  in  forgetfulness  of  God.  After  the  death  of  Augus- 
tine, the  Church  was  delivered  up,  bound  hand  and  foot,  into  this 
semi-heathenism.  Peter  P\illo,  who  had  been  condemned  by  the 
fifth  general  synod,  was  the  originator  and  first  to  introduce  (470) 
saint-worship  into  the  hymnals  and  litanies  of  the  Church. t  But  it 
was  not  until  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century  when  Gregory 
the  GreatJ  firmly  and  formally  promulgated  a  new  article  of  faith,  by 
adopting  the  cultus  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  other  saints  into 
the  regulated  public  worship, 

Its  introduction  into  the  Oriental  Church  occurred  somewhat 
later,  and  in  the  course  of  the  iconoclastic  controversies.  John  of 
Damascus  had  defended  it  beforehand  on  traditional  grounds,  but  it 
was  not  ecclesiastically  adopted  until  the  second  Nicene  Council§  in 
787.  And  although  the  rise  and  progress  of  this  "  relic  of  heathen- 
ism," as  some  one  expressively  calls  it,  was  very  slow  and  subtle,  its 
original  germs  fastening  themselves  in  parasitic  fashion  on  the  young 
and  vigorous  growth  of  Christianity,  nevertheless  by  the  begmning 
of  the  fifteenth  century  it  had  enfolded  the  entire  tree  like  a  poison 

*  Bossuet-Cramer  ;  Einleitung  in  die  Geschichte  der  Welt  und  Religion,  4, 

341- 

t  Chemnitz:  Examen,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5. 

J  Tittman  :  Augsburgische  Confession,  126.        • 

§  Guericke  :  Christliche  Symbolik,  245. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  853 

ivy,  striking  its  deadly  tendrils  into  every  fiber,  sucking  out  the  life 
forces  of  pure  spiritual  worship  and  threatening  to  deprive  it  of  all 
its  fruitfulness.  Milman*  tells  us  that  the  saints  "intercepted  the 
worship  of  the  Almighty  Father,  the  worship  of  the  Divine  Son.  To 
them  rather  than  through  them  prayer  was  addressed;  their  shrines 
received  the  more  costly  oblations;  they  were  the  rulers,  the  actual 
disposing  Providence  on  earth." 

And  yet,  if  Protestants  are  permitted  to  judge  according  to  the 
noted  rule  of  Vincent  de  Lerins,  viz.:  That  whatsoever  is  Catholic 
must  be  adopted  semper,  iibiqtie,  ovmibtis,  invocation  of  the  saints 
was  by  no  means  universally  accepted.  Epiphanius  severely  repre- 
hended it  and  classed  it  among  the  heresies.  Chrysostomf  repeat- 
edly censured  the  disposition  of  the  common  people  to  have  recourse 
to  the  saints  in  prayer.  So  did  many  others  of  prominence  in  the 
Greek  Church.  The  twenty-fifth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea, 
in  the  fourth  century,  pronounced  angelolatry  idolatry.  Helvidius,| 
an  energetic  reformer  of  the  fourth  century,  opposed  it  on  the 
ground  of  Holy  Scripture,  reason  and  morality.  Ambrose  rejected 
it,  in  his  best  days,  as  a  heathen  superstition.  The  bitter  contro- 
versy between  Jerome  and  Vigilantius  grew  out  of  the  latter's 
charge  that  to  invoke  the  dead  was  ridiculous  and  heathenish. § 
The  views  of  Augustine — though  he  is  claimed  as  a  mighty  defender 
— fairly  stated,  show  that  he  thought  it  doubtful  whether  the  dead, 
through  God's  power,  participate  in  the  affairs  of  the  living;  whether 
the  saints  can  furnish  assistance ;  prayers  are  not  to  be  centered 
upon  the  dead,  but  upon  the  adorable  and  ever-living  God;  catholic 
Christians  adore  no  dead  being  ;  the  apparent  miracles  at  the  tombs 
of  the  martyrs,  if  genuine,  are  the  work  of  God  ;  "  whom  shall  I 
find  that  can  reconcile  me  to  God  ?  Only  the  one  true  Mediator, 
Jesus  Christ,  who  is  my  only  hope."||  And  the  influence  of  his 
opinions  was  felt  throughout  the  later  history, 

Claudius,  of  Turin,  A.  D.  820,  petitioned  the  Emperor  Ludwig  to 
have  the  images  taken  from  the  churches,  and  himself  preached 
"like  fire"  against  all  visible  mediators,  admonishing  the  people  to 

♦Latin  Christianity,  Vol.  IV.,  13,204. 

t  Chemnitz  :  Examen,  Pt.  3.  Sec.  5.  \  Herzog  :    5,  730. 

\  Herzog  ;  5,  692. 

II  See  Chemnitz,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  5,  chap.  3,  for  condensed  passages  from  Augus- 
tine's writings. 

55 


854  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

enter  into  communion  with  God  through  the  one  Mediator,  Jesus 
Christ.*  Charlemagne  {84O)  directed  that  no  new  saints  should  be 
catalogued  for  veneration. f  Gundulph  of  northern  France,  in  the 
lOth  century,  insisted  that  the  saints  had  no  miraculous  power. 
Archbishop  Guibert,^  Chancellor  of  Emperor  Henry  III.,  vigorously 
wrote  against  it.  One  of  the  most  pronounced  elements  of  opposi- 
tion on  the  part  of  all  the  sects  in  the  Middle  Ages,  was  war  against 
saint  worship  as  a  corruption  §  of  primitive  Christianity. 

These  utterances — manly  and  positive  as  they  may  be — are  only 
the  sporadic  and  unorganized  pretests  of  individual  believers,  whose 
voices  were  speedily  silenced  by  the  edicts  of  councils,  the  anathemas 
of  popes,  and  the  irresistible  tendency  of  the  increasing  ecclesiasti- 
cism.  It  was  left  to  the  Confessors  at  Augsburg  to  frame  a  definite 
doctrinal  statement  against  the  invocation  of  the  saints;  and  this 
they  did  on  one  insuperable  and  conclusive  argument. 

I.  It  is  Contrary  to  the  Word  of  God. 

''''TJie  Scripture  does  not  teach  tis  to  invoke  saints  or  to  seek  aid  from 
them."  The  language  is  brief,  but  well  chosen  and  decisive.  In  the 
true  spirit  of  conciliation,  they  were  prepared  to  let  their  case  rest 
on  this  conservative  utterance;  but  Luther,  the  falcon- eyed  leader 
of  the  Reformation,  was  more  far-seeing  and  gives  added  strength  to 
the  statement  of  the  confessors.  In  the  Smalcald  Articles  ||  he  says: 
"  Saint  worship  is  neither  commanded  nor  advised  and  has  no  ex- 
ample in  the  Scriptures."  The  confutators  vainly  perverted  "the 
law  and  testimony  "  to  overthrow  the  evangelical  argument.  The 
Council  of  Trent  does  not  pretend  to  supply  any  authority  from 
God's  word  in  support  of  its  standpoint,  and  Eck  in  his  Manual  for 
Catholic  Christians  expressly  admits  the  fact,  but  passes  it  over  as 
immaterial. 

Yet  this  was  the  impregnable  fortress  of  the  Reformers.  "  It  is  a 
dishonor  to  the  Church,"  says  Chemnitz,^  "to  introduce  or  adopt  an 
article  of  faith  for  which  there  is  no  safe,  solid  and  unmistakable 
testimony  in  the  canonical  Scriptures ;  and  this  is  of  special  import- 
ance in  regard  to  prayer  and  worship,  for  here  our  relation  to  Di- 
vinity needs  precise  definitions."  That  Cardinal  Gibbons  considers 
this  argument  of  the  weightiest  importance,  is  plain  enough  in  his 

*Herzog;   17,191;  Neander  ;  3,  132;  f  Neander.  J  Ibid. , 

g  Ibid.  II  Mueller,  305.  T[  Pt.  3,  Sec.  3. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  855 

attempted  vindication  of  saintly  invocation.  Admitting  some  doubt 
about  his  reader  being  satisfied  with  quotations  from  the  "ecclesias- 
tical writers  of  the  first  ages"  as  proof  of  Roman  Catholic  teaching, 
he  tacitly  acknowledges  the  testimony  of  the  Bible  of  essential 
importance.  He  says:*  "If  you  have  no  doubt  that  the  saints  can 
hear  }'our  prayers  and  have  the  poivcr  and  the  ivill  to  assist  you, 
you  will  readily  admit  that  it  is  salutary  to  ask  their  intercessions." 
Then  he  adduces  numerous  texts  to  show  that  the  saints  hold  com- 
munication with  us,  have  the  ability  to  aid  us,  and  are  willing  to 
exert  their  influence  in  our  favor»  He  gives  to  his  reasons  the 
most  plausible  coloring,  full  of  learning,  wisdom  and  a  truly  Chris- 
tian spirit;  but  there  are  three  serious  objections  to  his  citations; 
and,  as  his  are  the  citations  upon  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has 
built  whenever  she  attempted  any  scriptural  defense  of  saint  worship, 
the  objections  to  them  will  refute  the  usual  appeals  to  divine  author- 
ity in  justification  of  this  dogma,  (i)  Those  passages  which  he 
urges  with  the  greatest  vehemence  and  plausibility  are  taken  from 
the  Apocryphal  books.  (2)  Those  which  are  cononical,  do  not, 
when  subjected  to  the  strictest  rules  of  fair  interpretation,  settle  his 
premises.  (3)  He  cites  not  a  solitary  passage  that  directly  com- 
mands invocation,  and  those  which  positively  forbid  it  he  does  not 
mention  at  all. 

A  brief  examination  of  a  few  of  these  passages  is  demanded  both 
on  the  score  of  fairness  to  our  opponents  and  in  proof  of  our  own 
allegations,  i.  Judas  Maccabeusf  in  the  night  before  his  struggle 
with  the  impious  Nicanor,  in  a  dream  beheld  Onias,  the  high-priest, 
long  since  dead,  standing  with  outstretched  arms  and  praying  for 
the  people  of  God.  But  this  book  is  apocryphal  :  Judas  recites  a 
dream  to  animate  his  troops — not  an  actual  occurrence  ;  it  is  not 
proven  that  Onias  was  cognizant  of  the  individual  and  special  cir- 
cumstances of  the  people;  neither  Judas  nor  his  army  had  invoked 
Onias,  but  the  Lord  God  of  heaven  and  earth. |  2.  Jacob  on  his 
death  bed  asked  the  angel  to  bless  his  two  grandchildren. §  There- 
fore we  ought  also  to  invoke  the  assistance  of  created  beings,  reasons 
Romanism.  But  Jacob  here  invoked  the  benediction  of  an  uncre- 
ated Being — \\\q  Malak  jfeJiovaJi — the  Second  Person  in  the  Trinity, 


*  Faith  of  our  Fathers,  185.  f  II.  Maccab.  xv.,  14. 

t  Gerhard;  Loci  Theologici,  27,  cap.  8,  page  96.  §  Gen.  xlviii.,  16. 


856  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

as  Luther*  has  most  conclusively  shown,  by  clearly  pointing  out 
the  use  of  the  singular  verb  in  Jacob's  entire  petition,  which  proves 
that  he  believed  the  angel  to  be  one  with  his  father's  God  and  the 
God  who  had  shepherded  him  in  his  weary  pilgrimage.  3.  The 
fathers  of  the  old  covenant  frequently  made  use  of  the  names  and 
merits  of  the  patriarchs  in  their  appeals  to  Jehovah. f  Hence  we 
should  make  similar  use  of  the  saints.  But  it  was  only  and  solely 
in  God's  covenant  of  promise  to  the  patriarchs  that  these  ancient 
people  consciously  reposed  the  guaranty  of  his  gracious  and  holy 
guidance,  hence  in  their  prayer^  they  did  not  appeal  to  the  merits 
of  their  forefathers,  but  to  the  merciful  promises  of  the  Lord.|  4. 
Numerous  passages§  are  cited  by  the  controversialists  to  show  that 
intercessions  should  be  made  for  all  the  saints.  But  the  two  men — 
whom  no  one  ranks  in  logical  and  spiritual  acumen  to  interpret  the 
word  of  God — Chemnitz  and  Gerhard — unquestionably  prove  that 
these  quotations  from  the  sacred  writers  refer  expressly  to  the 
prayers  of  the  living  for  the  /iving,  and  that  of  prayer  by  those  who 
have  entered  into  their  rest  there  is  neither  an  admonition  or  ex- 
ample or  promise  in  the  canonical  Scriptures.  5.  There  was  shown 
to  the  Revelatory  a  golden  bowl  of  incense — t/ie  prayers  of  the 
saints.  But  these  are  the  ascriptions  of  glory  the  saints  render  to 
God  in  heaven — tlicir  prayers  to  God,  not  the  petitions  of  mundane 
suppliants  to  them  on  account  of  which  they  should  be  invoked,  sac- 
rifices offered  to  them,  holidays  appointed  to  their  honor;  churches, 
altars  and  monasteries  erected  to  their  exaltation.  6.  God  answered 
to  Jeremiah's  supplicationTJ  for  mercy  on  the  Jewish  nation: 
"  Though  Moses  and  Samuel  stood  before  me,  yet  my  mind  could 
not  be  toward  this  people;"  and  does  not  that  indicate  God's  readi- 
iness  to  hear  the  intercessions  of  the  dead  ?  The  truth  conveyed  is 
that  idolatry  is  such  a  dreadful  thing  that  even  the  living  presence 
of  these  great  lawgivers  could  not  save  the  guilty.  7.  The  repro- 
bate Dives**  in  the  place  of  torment  could  hold  communication  with 
the  just  Abraham  in  Paradise  ;  why  can  there  not  then  be  inter- 
change of  thought  between  the  saints  in  heaven  and  their  brethren 

*  Speaker's  Commentary,  z«  loco.  fAn  instance;  Gen.  xxxii.  9. 

X  Oehler,  O.  T.  Theology,  66. 

\  I  Tim.  ii,  compared  with  Rom.  xv.;  Col.  iv.;  James  v.;  Gen.  xviii.  and  xx.; 
Job  xlii.;  Ezekiel  xxii. 

II  Rev.  V.  8.  If  Jeremiah  xv.  i.  **  Luke  xvi.  24. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  857 

on  the  earth?  And  this  is  absolutely  the  only  instance  of  interces- 
sion to  a  saint  recorded  in  God's  word;  and  it  is  utterly  rejected; 
the  example  is  not  encourat^ing. 

There  is  absolutely  no  mention  in  Scripture  o[  zx^y  examples  giv- 
ing the  least  encouragement  to  invocation.  On  the  contrary,  wher- 
ever celestial  beings  appeared  upon  earth  all  attempts  at  adoration 
were  resisted.  The  same  abhorrence  shown  by  Paul  and  Barnabas 
at  Lystra*  and  Peter's  gentle  but  peremptory  rebuke  of  Cornelius.f 
In  the  face  of  worshipful  prostration,  appears  in  the  instances  of  at- 
tempted angelic  adoration.  When  John  fell  down  to  worship  before 
the  feet  of  the  angel,  the  latter  charged  :  "  See  thou  do  it  not,  for  I 
am  thy   fellow  servant,  and   of  thy  brothers  the  prophets:  luorskip 

Godrx 

Neither  is  there  any  ground  of  proof  in  favor  of  invocation  of  created 
beings  in  the  case  of  the  Theophanies  which  form  a  prominent  feature 
in  the  early  history  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  and  which  are 
repeatedly  cited  by  Roman  Catholic  writers  to  justify  their  system  of 
worship.  Cardinal  Newman,  for  instance,  appealing  to  Augustine, 
affirms  that  here  is  the  natural  introduction  to  the  Cultiis  Sanetonan% 
and  the  primary  ground  from  which  the  development  of  the  doc- 
trine has  arisen.  He  maintains  that  those  visible  appearances  were 
creatures,  no  matter  what  they  represented,  and  if  so,  then  the 
patriarchs  were  the  first  who  worshipped  creatures,  not  indeed  in 
themselves,  but  as  the  token  of  the  One  greater  than  themselves. 
But  is  it  not  begging  the  question  to  affirm  that  these  patriarchs 
consciously  worshipped  the  Creator  in  the  form  of  a  creature? 
They  prostrated  themselves  before  a  Presence,  but  did  they  assume 
it  to  be  a  created  presence  ?  Did  not  Moses  hide  his  face  because 
he  was  afraid  to  look  upon  God  ?  Did  not  Jacob  say :  "  I  have 
seen  God  face  to  face?"  There  is  absolutely  nothing  to  show  that 
they  consciously  worshipped  the  infinite  Divinity  hidden  under  the 
form  of  a  secondary  divinity;  for  in  instances  of  their  bowing  down 
before  a  supposed  created  presence,  it  was  after  the  manner  of  an 
oriental  obeisance,  and  not  an  exhibition  of  divine  worship.  But 
even  on  the  supposition  that  they  had  rested  their  worship  instru- 
mentally  upon  the  visible  presence,  and  spiritually  located  it  upon 

*Acts  xiv.  15.  t  Acts  X.  26.  X  Rev.  xxii.  8,  9,  Vulgate. 

{  Development  of  Christian  Doctrine,  138. 


858  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  invisible,  it  would  none  the  less  remain  true  as  Mgr.  Pannilini,* 
bishop  of  Chiusi,  pointedly  says:  "Worship  ought  not  to  result  in 
the  object  underlying  it,  (or  redound  in  it) — but  be  given  to  that 
object."  And  if  there  was  an  emphatic  opposition  to  all  idolatry  in 
the  patriarchal  worship — as  the  Romish  argument  concedes — how 
much  less  ground  for  the  least  semblance  for  it  now,  since  grace 
and  truth  have  come  by  Jesus  Christ. 

Neither  the  pious  appeals  of  Roman  Catholic  divines,  nor  the 
acute  reasonings  of  the  profoundest  theologians,  nor  the  infallible 
pronunciamentos  of  oecumenical  councils,  have  yet  been  able  to 
answer  the  words  of  the  Confessors.  There  is  not  an  available 
sentence  in  the  Bible,  either  of  precept,  example  or  promise,  which 
they  can  fairly  cite  to  favor  saint  worship.  On  the  contrary,  the 
entire  system  is  unqualfiedly  condemned  by  commandment,  instruc- 
tion and  admonition.  And  if  it  be  charged  that  Protestants  in 
general  and  the  Confessors  in  particular  argued  their  own  opinions 
into  the  word  of  God,  the  quick  rejoinder  that  those  opinions  are 
consistent  with  that  Word  is  just  as  true  as  the  historical  fact  that 
the  Confutators  perverted  the  plain  teachings  of  holy  scripture  and 
deduced  from  them  utterly  irrational  conclusions,  which,  in  defiance 
of  reason  and  common  sense,  are  defended  as  the  abutments  of 
papal  authority. 

But  is  the  teaching'  of  the  Holy  Scripture  sufficient  f  In  answer  to 
this  question  the  Romish  Church  to-day  produces,  not  officially  it 
is  true,  but  none  the  less  gladly,  that  masterly  work  of  John  Henry 
Newman  on  the  Development  of  Christian  Doctrine.  Its  entire 
argument  may  be  crystallized  into  the  terse  expression :  "A  doctrine 
to  be  catholic  needs  not  be  proven  by  Scripture;  it  is  the  product 
of  the  Church's  life."  It  is  implied  that  the  sacred  writings  in  them- 
selves are  inadequate  and  thus  virtually  admitted,  on  the  one  hand, 
that  the  early  Christians  were  at  a  great  disadvantage,  and  on  the 
other  there  is  demanded  of  us  a  belief  in  the  grandest,  most  com- 
prehensive and  fascinating  system  of  worship  founded  upon  nothing 
substantially  proven  ;  built  up  after  the  manner  of  scientific  hypoth- 
esis, and  settled  by  the  laws  of  an  ecclesiastical  evolution!  Thus,  as 
Dr.  Tullochf  happily  expresses  it,  the  author  of  the  "  development 
theory"  and  mightiest  apologist  for  the  central  doctrine  of  Roman 

*  Jenkins  :  Romanism  of  Pius  IV.,  192. 

t  Religious  Thought  in  Britain  in  the  19th  Century. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  859 

Catholicism,  with  his  ardent  followers,  has  rummaged  about  among 
the  debris  of  ancient  and  mediaeval  uncertainty^  instead  of  throwing 
the  bright  light  of  his  grand  intellect  and  the  fervor  of  his  warm 
heart  upon  the  living  pages  of  the  New  Testament.  The  develop- 
ment of  a  doctrine  rooted  and  grounded  in  nothing  but  a  traditional 
faith,  is  not  a  sufficient  justification  for  its  acceptance  in  practice. 
Too  many  intellectual  leaps  over  unbridged  chasms  are  needed  ;  too 
many  demands  to  enter  the  shadowy  realms  of  credulity  for  the 
heart  accustomed  to  confide  in  the  infallible  alone. 

Furthermore,  though  there  be  manifest  everywhere  a  law  of 
development  and  abounding  evidences  of  physical,  ethical,  ecclesias- 
tical and  theological  evolution,  nevertheless  the  idea  of  degeneracy 
has  established  itself  just  as  familiarly  in  our  minds.  Growth,  in 
its  unfolding  realities,  strikes  us  as  most  cornmon;  so  does  cor- 
ruption in  all  its  disgusting  forms.  We  see  things  becoming  better, 
we  also  see  them  getting  w^orse ;  and  some  that  have  been 
better  at  first  have  assumed  sad  deterioration  afterwards.  Deflec- 
tions arise,  and  then  the  departure  from  the  straight  line  may  be  in- 
sensible at  first,  but  none  the  less  fatal  in  its  steadiness.  No  reason- 
able human  being  will  undertake  to  frame  a  denial  to  this  sure  law 
of  decadence.  When  Dr.  Newman,*  therefore,  asks  us  to  believe 
that  invocation  of  the  saints  is  a  necessary  development  from  primi- 
tive Christian  worship,  w^e  may  respectfully  ask  him  to  prove  to  us 
that  it  is  not  a  divergence  from  the  practice  of  the  apostles  and  their 
successors. 

At  any  rate,  what  was  the  office  of  our  divine  Lord  as  the  great 
Teacher,  but  that  of  a  perfect  revealer  of  the  whole  truth  as  to  God 
and  his  worship?  Whatever  the  Father  willed  to  disclose  to  man, 
the  Son  made  known  in  all  its  completeness.  After  his  resurrection, 
the  Holy  Ghost  assumed  the  revealing  work,  and  taught  the  apostles 
the  same  divine  truth.  The  Lord  himself  had  said  to  his  apostles: 
"  He  shall  teach  you  the  whole  truth,  and  bring  all  things  to  your 
remembrance  whatsoever  I  have  said  unto  you."t  "The  Church  of 
this  day  can  not  know  more  than  St.  John,"  says  Pusey,  "else  the 
promise  would  not  have  been  fulfilled  to  him. "J; 

*See  Canon  Mozley  in  "Theory  of  Development,"  page  5  f. 
tjohnxiv.  26.  J  Eirenicon,  85. 


86o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION 

II.     Invocation  of  the  Saints  Derogatory  to  the  Glory  of 

Christ. 

From  the  word  of  God  as  a  sufificient  revelation  against  the  invo- 
cation of  saints,  we  naturally  turn  to  the  Redeemer  of  mankind  there 
revealed.  The  Confessors  make  this  the  next  link  in  their  argu- 
ment. They  say:  "  TJie  Scripture  proposes  Christ  to  ns  as  our  only 
Mediator,  Propitiation,  High  Priest  and  Intercessor."  In  thus  em- 
phasizing the  characteristic  offices  of  the  true  Messiah,  they  ascribe 
to  him  all  mediatorial  glory.  They  can  permit  no  subordinate,  or 
co-mediators,  as  Harms*  calls  them.  Lutherf  states  incisively  in 
the  Smalcald  Articles  that  the  invocation  of  the  saints  "  is  a  part  of 
the  abuses  and  errors  of  Antichrist,  and  destroys  the  true  knowledge 
of  Christ  as  the  Redeemer;"  and  in  one  of  his  sermons  he  adds,  that 
"  inasmuch  as  people  Jost  their  hold  on  Christ,  and  thought  him 
rude  and  ungracious,  they  turned  to  the  saints,  supposing  that  they 
could  by  their  exertions  soften  the  acerbity  of  him  who  once  said  : 
*  Come  unto  me,  all  ye  who  are  weary  and  heavy  laden.'  "  And  by 
that  act  they  undermine  the  mediatorial  authority  of  Christ,  and  rob 
him  of  the  prerogatives  of  his  sole  mediatorship. 

But  there  can  be  only  one  mediator.  "  The  redeeming  Saviour, 
whose  destiny  is  to  restore  the  fellowship  with  God  interrupted  by 
sin,  must  stand  on  the  one  hand  in  perfect  fellowship  with  the 
human  race,  and  on  the  other  hand  in  perfect  fellowship  with  God. 
Otherwise  he  can  not  form  a  bond  of  union  between  the  two." 
Now  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  created  being,  glorified  or  unglorified, 
can  stand  at  the  same  time  in  a  relation  of  perfect  unity  with  the 
human  race,  and  also  in  a  relation  of  antithesis  to  that  race,  not 
simply  because  he  alone  in  the  midst  of  a  sinful  world  was  without 
sin,  but  because  no  one  can  come  to  the  Father  except  through 
him.  He  alone  is  the  giver ;  all  others  are  receivers.  The  lucid 
unfolding' of  this  soteriological  position  by  Martensen;};  is  a  conclu- 
sive commentary  on  the  declaration  of  St.  Paul :  "  For  there  is  one 
God,  one  mediator  also  between  God  and  men,  himself  man,  Christ 
Jesus,  who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all."  The  glory  of  the  only 
begotten  one  can  not  be  understood  unless  we  start  with  this  con- 
ception of  one  God  and  one  mediator.  On  this  point  the  teaching 
of  the  Confession  is  so  specific  and  so  unmistakably  consistent  with 

*  Mit  Mitiler  tind  Nebenmitler.        f  Mueller.        J  Christian  Dogmatics,  259. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  86l 

the  teaching  of  God's  word,  that  the  confutators  involuntarily 
acknowledged  its  logical  conclusiveness  by  coining  a  distinction  be- 
tween a  mediator  of  redemption  and  a  mediator  of  intercession,  in 
order  to  justify  the  employment  of  saints  and  yet  keep  up  the  ap- 
pearance that  it  is  not  derogatory  to  the  honor  of  Christ  nor  incon- 
sistent witii  his  sole  mediatorship.  But  there  is  not  a  vestige  of 
any  such  distinction  to  be  found  in  the  sacred  Scriptures.  Carpzov,* 
in  commenting  on  I  Timothy  Hi.  5,  quoted  above,  asserts  that  medi- 
ator of  redemption  and  mediator  of  intercession  are  one  and  the 
same  thing,  and  fortifies  himself  by  quoting  the  authority  of  Origen, 
Augustine,  and  Isidore  of  Seville.  Better  yet  is  the  authority  of 
the  New  Testament.  "  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go?  Thou  hast  the 
words  of  eternal  life."t  "  I  am  the  way  and  the  truth  and  the  life  : 
no  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  me."|  "  In  none  other  is 
there  salvation  ;  for  neither  is  there  any  other  name  under  heaven, 
that  is  given  among  men,  wherein  we  must  be  saved. "§  And  that 
we  need  no  other  mediator  requires  no  specific  statement  when  we 
remember  that  Jesus  Christ  is  both  God  and  man,||  that  he  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  the  sin  of  the  world  ^  and  that  the  Father  has 
accepted  him  as  having  perfectly  answered  the  demands  of  the  law.** 
The  writings  of  the  "  Fathers  "  are  a  vast  apologetic  library  on  the 
all-sufficiency  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Saviour  of  mankind.  And  the 
deepest  soul  longings,  the  purest  consciousness  of  realized  salvation, 
as  recorded  in  sacred  song,  constitute  unceasing  testimony  to  the 
saving  power  of  the  Son  of  God.  What  a  mass  of  Christology  and 
truly  precious  soteriology  in  our  best  hymns!  "Thou,  O  Christ, 
art  all  I  want."  "  Light,  riches,  healing  of  the  mind.  Yea,  all  I  need 
in  thee  I  find."  "  Jesus,  my  Advocate  above,  my  Friend  before  the 
throne  of  love."     "  Thou  must  save,  and  thou  alone." 

If  there  is  one  essential  more  completely  fortified  in  Scripture 
than  another  it  is  this  one  of  our  salvation  being  possible  solely  and 
entirely  on  the  merits  of  the  God-man.  He  is  the  propitiation  for 
our  sins.  "  Truly  in  the  Lord  our  God  is  the  salvation  of  Israel. "ff 
"  If  any  man  sin  we  have  an  advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ 
the  righteous."  Upon  this  one  passage  the  Confessors  rely  for  the 
confirmation  of  their  doctrine. 

*  Isagoge  in  libros,  etc.,  545.  f  John  vi.  68.  %  Ibid,  xiv.  6. 

g  Acts  iv.  12.  llJohn  viii.  58;  Matt.  xvi.  13.  ^  Matt.  xvii.  5. 

**  Rom.  ill.  25  and  i  John  iv.  10.         ff  Jeremiah  ill.  23  and  l  John  ii.  i. 


862  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

But  invocation  of  the  saints  presupposes  their  intercessory  poivers. 
This  is  indeed  the  central  position  of  the  doctrine  so  far  as  it  touches 
the  work  of  the  Redeemer.  So  diametrically  opposed  to  each  other 
are  Protestantism  and  Catholicism  at  this  point,  that  when  the  former 
says :  "  The  Israelites  of  old  had  no  clear  knowledge,  as  we  have,  of 
one  great  mediator,  who  is  making  intercession  for  us,  mid  yet  they 
sought  not  the  good  offices  of  the  superhuman  beings  of  whose 
existence  they  had  no  doubt,  the  latter  replies,  and  therefore^  they 
made  no  application  to  them  for  aid.  They  knew  so  little  of  Christ, 
and  yet  did  not  call  upon  the  spirits  of  the  departed,  say  the  Con- 
fessors; the  Confutators  answer,  because  they  knew  so  little  of  him 
therefore  they  failed  to  invoke  those  who  had  been  saved  by  faith  in 
his  name.  The  Augsburg  Confession  teaches  that  there  is  only  one 
intercessor  on  whom  we  are  to  call;  and  he  promises  that  he  will 
hear  our  prayers.  He  should  be  called  upon  in  every  affliction. 
The  dogma  of  Rome  is  that  angels  and  the  saints,  at  whose  head  is 
the  Virgin,  intercede  for  us,  and  being  able  to  hear  and  answer  our 
petitions,  "  it  is  good  and  useful  suppliantly  to  invoke  them  and  to 
have  recourse  to  their  prayers."  Romish  dogmaticians  in  unfolding 
and  enforcing  this  proposition  as  an  indispensable  part  of  their 
cultus,  appeal  to  three  very  important  considerations. 

1.  T/ie  divine  method  of  governing  the  universe.  With  much  earn- 
estness and  some  plausibility  it  is  argued  that  just  as  the  Father  in 
his  creative  and  providential  capacity  employs  the  laws  of  nature  for 
the  administration  of  his  purposes,  so  in  the  administration  of  his 
moral  purposes  he  employs  the  agency  of  angels  whom  he  has 
created  as  his  ministering  spirits.  And  just  as  Jesus  uses  the  sac- 
raments which  he  himself  has  instituted,  and  the  prayers  of  the 
Church  militant  to  promote  the  edification  of  the  faithful,  so  he  em- 
ploys the  intercessions  of  the  church  triumphant  for  their  protection 
in  calamity.  "Who  can  doubt,"  asks  the  Roman  Catechism,  "that 
the  saints  take  upon  themselves  the  work  of  our  defence,  when  he 
beholds  the  miracles  wrought  at  their  graves,  the  blind  having 
received  their  sight,  the  lame  healing,  the  dead  brought  to  life,  and 
devils  expelled  from  their  bodies  "Pf  The  analogy  is  not  well  taken ; 
if  the  reasoning  were  conclusive  we  might  inquire  whether  our 
prayers  for  temporal  blessings  should  not  be  addressed  to  the  laws 

*  Dublin  Review,  March  1883,  55. 
fBerger:  Evangelischer  Glaube,  273. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  863 

of  nature,  inasmuch  as  our  petitions  for  spiritual  blessings  are  to 
rise  to  the  angels  and  the  saints.  But  the  dishonor  to  Christ  in- 
volved in  such  a  pantheistic  worship  is  not  its  only  objection. 
Aside  from  its  uselessness  there  is  the  reflex  injuriousness  arising 
from  all  selfish  devotion.  The  heart  which  is  forever  crying  after 
blessings  is  not  the  heart  in  which  dwells  the  Saviour  formed  the 
"  hope  of  glory."  And  although  these  saints  and  angels  are  "  min- 
istering spirits."  whereas  the  laws  of  nature  are  but  "blind  forces," 
both  are  equally  the  messengers  of  God,  and  He  is  to  be  invoked 
for  their  intervention — the  agent,  not  the  agencies. 

2.  Hujn.in  sinfulness  as  against  Christ's  Jioliness  makes  the  inter- 
cessions of  the  saints  necessary.  Our  sins  render  us  very  unworthy 
to  come  immediately  to  Christ  himself,  who  is  unpeconcilable  be- 
cause of  his  immaculate  purity,  terribly  displeased  because  of  our 
transgressions.  Luther  attributed  to  this  most  foolish  and  errone- 
ous notion  the  dreadful  tenacity  and  commercial  value  saint-worship 
assumed  in  his  day.  People,  in  their  God-forgetfulness,  stood  in 
terror  of  the  judgment,  and  readily  consented  to  pacify  some  tute- 
lary inter-mediator  to  gain  the  benefits  of  his  intercessions.  The 
utter  unreasonableness  of  this  argument  ought  to  make  an  appeal 
to  the  word  of  God -unnecessary.  Yet,  does  not  Christ  know  them 
whom  he  invites  and  commands  to  come  to  him?*  "Whatsoever 
ye  shall  ask  in  my  name  that  will  I  do."t  "  Who  is  he  that  shall 
condemn  ?  It  is  Christ  Jesus  that  died,  yea  rather  that  was  raised 
from  the  dead,  who  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketh 
intercession  for  us. "J  Indeed,  the  entire  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is 
a  most  precious  demonstration  that  Jesus  is  the  compassionate  High 
Priest,  capable  of  entering  into  intensest  sympathy  with  every  one. 
The  Romanist  maintains  that  the  concern  of  his  saint  for  him  in- 
tensifies when  he  is  translated  from  the  here  to  the  afterward,  but 
the  love  of  Him  who  rescued  that  saint  is  chilled  by  his  ascension 
into  heaven!  We  have  not  so  learned  Christ.  "I  will  not  leave 
you  comfortless.     I  will  come  to  you."§ 

3.  TJie  incarnation  of  Christ  is  regarded  among  Catholics  as  the 
invincible  argument  in  favor  of  the  Cultus  Sanctorn^n.  Christ  is 
the  God-man.  The  Son  of  God  became  the  son  of  man.  The  di- 
vine entered  into  union  with  the  human,  and  by  virtue  of  this  union 
the  human  partakes  of  at  least  certain  communicable  qualities  of 

*Matt.  xi.  28.  tjohnxv.  16.  J  Rom.  viii.  34.         gjohnxiv.  18. 


864  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  divine.  As  the  divinity  has  become  incarnated  into  the  human 
nature  so  the  humanity  has  become  implanted  into  the  divine,  hence 
there  is  a  divine  humanity,  at  the  head  of  which  stands  the  second 
Person  of  the  Trinity — the  living  bond  of  inter-communion  between 
God  and  the  redeemed  race.  All  the  saints  are,  therefore,  constantly 
with  him  and  participate  in  his  activities.  The  entire  host  make  out 
a  sort  of  halo  about  him  ;  each  one  partakes  of  the  instinctive  om- 
niscience of  Christ;  wherever  he  goes  they  go;  whatever  he  does 
they  do;  on  earth  infirmity  clung  to  them,  on  high  their  being  is 
made  perfect,  and  they  freely  carry  out  that  great  part  which  here 
below  they  but  rehearsed,  and  when  the  Scripture  says:  "The  Spirit 
maketh  intercession  for  us,"  the  meaning  is,  the  host  of  saints  is 
praying  for  us,«for  the  Spirit  is  the  life  of  the  Church.* 

The  charge  against  Protestants  is  ignorance  of  the  meaning  and 
logical  tendencies  of  the  incarnation.  If  they  understood  the  vast 
significance  of  this  transaction  they  could  not  help  but  join  in  direct- 
ing their  supplications  to  the  dead  in  Christ,  and  make  that  a  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  Christianity. 

The  thought  demands  sober  treatment,  reserved,  if  critical;  rev- 
erent, if  bold;  "  for  nothing  which  has  ever  interested  humanity  or 
profoundly  moved  it,  is  treated  with  contempt  by  a  wise  and  good 
man."f  The  difficulty  lies  not  in  denouncing  the  assumption,  but 
in  apprehending  it ;  disputants  who  are  more  intent  on  assailing 
others  than  defending  themselves  will  rather  make  loop-holes  for 
the  enemy  than  a  way  for  their  own  escape.     Audi  partem  alteram. 

The  profound  importance  of  the  incarnation  on  the  cultus  of  the 
saints  can  not  be  belittled  with  a  sneer.  Doubtless,  much  of  the 
Bible  notion  of  man's  relation  to  God  has  been  obscured  by  theo- 
logical bias.  Thus  the  Johannic  immanence  of  God  has  been  ob- 
scured by  the  Agustinian  transcendence.  But  the  theology  which 
removes  God  to  an  infinite  distance  from  man  does  not  harmonize 
with  the  philosophically  and  humanely  fascinating  thought  of  Scrip- 
ture that  God  is  very  near  at  hand — in  whom  we  live  and  move 
and  have  our  being. 

But  what  is  more  to  the  point  is,  that  if  the  incarnation  of  Jesus 
implies  an  incarnation  in  the  case  of  every  believer,  even  in  a  limited 
sense,  then  Christianity  is  analogous  to  Buddhism,|  which  teaches 

*  Dublin  Review,  March  1853,  44.  f  Tulloch  ;   19th  Century,  9. 

XAndover  Review,  March,  1886,  310. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  865 

unlimited  incarnations, — for  every  celebrated  teacher  is  a  Buddha. 
Probably  the  advocates  of  the  invocation  theory  would  not  deny 
this  inference,  since  the  infallible  church  has  enrolled  in  her  martyr- 
ologies  the  two  oriental  (mythical)  saints,  Josaphat  and  Barlaam, 
though  Max  Mueller*  has  shown  that  they  are  identical  with  Sakya- 
Mouni,  the  divine  founder  of  Buddhism,  and  one  of  his  apostles. 

Nevertheless,  Mohler  answers  :  "  They  who  would  worship  Christ, 
must  invoke  the  saints,"  on  the  supposition  that  he  dwells  in  them. 
And  at  the  head  of  the  great  host  stands  the  Virgin  Mary — the 
mirror  of  purest  womanhood,  as  says  St.  Ambrose,  the  impersona- 
tion of  all  virtue,  *  *  *  the  celestial  exemplar  of  all  grace,  the 
Tlieoiokos — mother  of  God.  Protestants  do  honor  her  above  all  in 
the  ranks  of  womankind ;  they  alloVv  her  all  legitimate  exaltation  ; 
in  no  sense  are  they  reluctant  to  sound  the  praises  of  the  "  Madonna 
who  bore  the  child."  To  them  she  is  a  nobler  ideal  than  to  hosts  of 
her  worshipers.  For  do  her  Roman  Catholic  devotees  venerate 
her  piety,  or  renunciation  of  the  world,  or  charity,  or  self-sacrificing 
devotion  as  a  woman  and  a  mother  ?  By  no  means ;  but  because 
she  is  supposed  to  be  capable  of  miraculous  power,  there  is  this 
lofty  adoration.  Who  is  the  Madonna  in  that  Church  to-day  ?  Is 
it  the  lowly  virgin  who  said:  "Behold  the  handmaid  of  the  Lord, be 
it  unto  me  according  to  thy  word  ?"t  Is  it  the  silent,  self-renounc- 
ing, willingly  obedient  mother  of  the  Redeemer*  as  she  is  painted  to 
us  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  ?  Is  it  her  pious  earthly  life  which  all 
their  representations  portray?  Not  at  all.  The  Madonna  is  in- 
voked for  her  ability  to  protect  and  her  .special  intercessions  with 
the  Son  of  God.  An  impartial  study  of  this  Virgin- cultus  leaves 
the  indelible  impression  that  the  mother  is  greater  than  the  Son, 
capable  of  more  efficient  sympathy,  quicker  to  hear  and  answer 
prayer,  and  a  mightier  and  more  intimate  friend  and  helper.  This 
is  the  logical  sequence  of  the  Romish  treatment  of  the  incarnation. 
Adopt  its  conclusions,  especially  that  it  virtually  defies  whosoever 
is  baptized  into  Christ,  and  you  will  be  compelled  to  admit  one 
of  the  most  potent  arguments  in  favor  not  only  of  Mariolatry,  but 
hagiolatry  in  their  unconditioned  signification.  That  is  to  say,  in 
calamities,  which  are  the  expressions  of  God's  anger,  the  people 
must  get  near  to  some  one  who  is  close  to  God  and  has  influence 

*  Contemporary  Revierv,  July  '70.  580.     See  also  Miracles  and  Saints,  44. 
fLuke  i.  38. 


866  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

with  him — close  to  some  one  of  the  secondary  intercessors.  Even 
Dean  Stanley  traces  back  the  longing  after  communion  with  some 
one  near  the  great  Invisible,  to  the  passion,  the  vehemence,  the 
urgency  of  some  great  sorrow  like  that  of  the  French  Christians  in 
the  fifteenth  century  uttering  their  piteous  supplications  for  deliver- 
ance. The  reply  of  Canon  Liddon*  is  sufficiently  forceful  in  its 
conclusiveness  :  "  Sorrow  of  itself  does  not  make  the  prayers  which 
it  multiplies  or  intensifies,  either  lawful  or  availing.  Sorrow  may 
quicken  the  instincts  of  superstition." 

But  even  here  the  Scriptures  must  remain  the  legitimate  argu- 
ment. Belief  in  the  intercession  of  the  saints  is  an  evidence  of  un- 
belief in  the  complete  and  all-sufficient  intercession  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  himself  Even  in  the  darkness  of  the  ninth  century,  Agobard 
of  Lyonsf  said  :  "Since  no  man  is  essentially  God,  save  Jesus  our 
Saviour,  so  we,  as  Scripture  commands,  should  bow  our  knees  to 
His  name  alone,  lest  by  giving  this  honor  to  another,  God  may  con- 
sider us  estranged  from  him."  "  He  ever  liveth  to  make  interces- 
sion for  them. "I  "  And  thus  saith  the  Lord  :§  Cursed  is  the  man 
that  trusteth  in  man  and  maketh  flesh  his  arm,  and  whose  heart  de- 
parteth  from  the  Lord."  Such  denunciation  of  all  unauthorized 
reliance  upon  human  beings  and  their  religious  veneration  was 
loudly  applauded  in  the  early  church.  Tertullian||  asks  :  "  Who 
permits  you  to  accord  to  man  that  which  has  been  reserved  for  the 
Deity  ?  The  martyr  has  enough  to  do  with  his  own  deficiencies. 
Who  but  the  Son  of  God  has  delivered  another  from  the  power  of 
death?"  And  Augustine:  "Make  no  religion  of  the  worship  of 
dead  men,  for,  if  they  lived  piously,  they  look  not  for  such  an  honor, 
but  want  us  to  honor  him  through  whom  they  are  able  to  rejoice 
in  the  light  of  truth."  This  decided  opposition,  little  regarded  by 
the  ecclesiastical  powers,  but  continued  for  many  centuries,  proves 
that  pious  Roman  Catholics  preferred  to  trust  themselves  immedi- 
ately to  the  intercession  of  Jesus  rather  than  to  the  intermediary 
prayers  of  the  saints.  The  ingenious  German  poet,  Anjclus  Silesius,\ 
though  he  had  renounced  the  Protestant  Church,  nevertheless  cries 
out : 

*Bampton  Lectures,  1866,  p.  528.  f  Neander,  III.,  429. 

X  Heb.  vii.  24,  25.  ^Jeremiah  xvii.  5. 

II  Carpzov,  540.  *\  Hase,  306. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  867 

"  Weg,  weg,  ihr  Seraphim  !  ihr  kcinnt  mich  nicht  eiqiiicken  ! 
Weg,  weg,  ihr  Heihgen  !  und  was  an  euch  thut  bhcken. 
Ich  will  nun  eurer  nicht ;  ich  werfe  mich  allein 
Ins  ungeschafifne  Meer  der  bloszen  Gottheit  ein." 

And  what  is  of  equally  serious  consideration,  the  invasion  of  the 
prerof^atives  of  Christ's  mediatorial  office  by  the  admission  of  these 
numberless  intercessors  introduces  an  element  of  uncertainty  into 
our  own  relations  with  Christ.  The  seeker  after  g-race  and  wisdom 
and  strength  knows  precisely  whither  to  turn  when  he  is  conscious 
of  only  One  almighty  deliverer,  and  is  unhampered  by  a  multiplicity 
of  inferior  objects  of  worship.  He  need  listen  to  one  voice  alone: 
"  Come  unto  me."  But  who  among  the  subordinate  mediators  is 
the  one  most  likely  to  hear  his  supplications,  St.  Ann  or  St.  Michael? 
Confusion  and  embarrassment  must  distract  his  worship  and  rob 
him  of  the  assurance  of  faith.  Erasmus  relates  that  a  suppliant 
whose  tutelary  saint  was  Nicolaus,  and  who,  during  a  shipwreck, 
when  in  the  most  threatening  danger  each  one  was  calling  on  his 
particular  patron  defender,  feared  that  his  own  saint  would  either 
not  hear  his  pressing  petition  (the  ship  was  already  sinking),  or  had 
to  pay  attention  to  others  who  were  invoking  him  at  the  same  time, 
or  might  not  speedily  enough  obtain  audience  of  God,  turned  away 
from  him  and  offered  his  petition  directly  to  the  only  Saviour.* 
Admit  that  this  is  but  mockery.  Is  there  not  terrible  significance 
in  the  incident, and  does  it  not  speak  incontestably  for  itself?  Wick- 
liffcf  saw  the  subject  in  the  same  light:  "The  devil  may  work  in 
the  pretended  saints.;{:  The  soul  becomes  distracted  by  the  multi- 
tudes of  saints  who  are  recommended  for  invocation.  It  may  like- 
wise turn  out  that  the  foolish  devotee  is  worshiping  a  canonized 
devil."  And  Luther  asks  :  "  Why  will  you  forsake  the  safe  and 
certain,  and  worry  with  that  which  has  neither  merit  or  necessity  or 
command  ?"§  And  does  not  this  uncertainty  grow  into  a  crime 
when  we  consider  the  perilous  loss  of  time  which  such  indirect 
devotion  invoh'es  ?  Every  member  of  the  Church  of  Rome  claims 
that  all  our  direct  worship  and  service  belong  to  God  and  his 
Christ ;  but  where,  amid  the  few  fragments  of  time  allotted  us  on 
earth  and  our  manifold  engagements,  shall  even  the  most  devoted 
Christians  find  time  to  divide  their  devotions  between  the  direct  and 
indirect? 

*  Tittman  :  Augsburgi  Confessio,  128.  f  Neander. 

X  I  Tim.  iv.  I.  I  Works,  liii.,  139. 


868  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

Here  we  may  stop  long  enough  to  emphasize  the  irresistible  con- 
clusion that  invocation  of  the  saints  is  illogical^  iinneccssary,  and 
useless.  It  has  no  solid  foundation  in  reason.  Being  contrary  to 
the  contents  of  the  divine  revelation,  it  must  stand  in  conflict  with 
the  enlightened  and  unprejudiced  understanding.  The  laws  of 
thought  and  promptings  of  the  heart  contradict  its  claims.  The 
God  who  speaks  in  his  word  speaks  also  in  his  rational  creations. 
And  that  it  is  unreasonable  to  demand  our  worship  for  those  crea- 
tions after  their  transition  into  the  unseen  world,  must  be  manifest 
from  their  very  nature.  The  saints  in  heaven  differ  in  no  vital  par- 
ticular from  those  on  earth  as  concerns  their  attributes.  Canoniza- 
tion even  can  not  communicate  to  them  any  extra  endowments,  can 
not  remove  external  and  internal  obstacles,  can  not  remedy  the 
essential  limitations.  Romanism,  without  giving  the  proof,  asserts 
that  it  can ;  Protestantism  replies,  it  can  not,  because  the  Bible 
nowhere  gives  the  least  intimation  of  any  such  prerogative,  or  of 
any  added  rights  and  powers  after  death.  Have  the  saints  any 
knowledge  of  our  circumstances?  This  involves  the  question  of 
their  omniscience  and  omnipotence,  at  least  ubiquity,  perpetual 
cognizance,  hearing  prayer,  reading  the  heart.*  They  are  either  in 
possession  of  these  divine  attributes  or  they  are  not.  If  they  are 
not,  then  worshiping  them  is  the  baldest  and  most  useless  super- 
stition. True,  the  Council  of  Trent  conditions  the  promulgation  of 
this  dogma  on  the  abandonment  of  all  superstition,  but  remains 
shrewdly  silent  as  to  what  manifestations  of  superstition  are  in- 
tended. 

But  Romanistsf  insist  that  the  saints  do  possess  all  the  necessary 
attributes  for  intercommunication  with  the  faithful;  they  know  all 
about  us;  distance  is  but  an  accidental  interruption;  space  can  not 
interfere  in  intellectual  communication;  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that 
matter  can  constitute  any  obstacle  to  spiritual  communication  be- 
tween earth  and  heaven.  The  blind  man  can  not  see  his  friend,  but 
that  does  not  imply  that  his  friend  has  lost  the  power  of  seeing  him. 
If,  however,  the  blind  man  knows  anything,  he  is  conscious  that  his 
friend  can  see  him  without  the  power  of  seeing  all  things,  and  be 
present  with  him  without  being  everywhere  present.  It  is  easy 
enough  to  see  that  the  Romish  reasoning  rests  on  probabilities,  and 

*  Dublin  Review,  1853,  p.  48  f. 

t  Milman,  History  of  Christianity  ;  Book  IV.,  426. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  869 

the  principle  of  probability  doubtless  plays  an  important  part  in 
many  a  man's  religion  ;  but  this  is  no  more  than  a  process  of  "make 
believe,"  as  Tulloch  characterizes  the  theory  of  Newman  and  his 
followers.  Only  assent  strongly  to  anything  and  the  power  of  in- 
tellectual creativeness  may  in  time  project  it  as  a  reality  to  the  vision 
of  the  credulous.  Does  not  my  friend  of  whom  I  have  heard  noth- 
ing for  twenty  years  pray  for  me  any  more?  Granted  he  does  ;  but 
what  special  petitions  does  he  offer  in  my  behalf?  My  circum- 
stances are  entirely  changed.  Does  not  my  father,  who  died  when  I 
was  a  lad  of  fourteen,  intercede  for  me  any  longer?  But  how  shall 
he  know  the  present  character  of  my  environments,  which  he  must 
know  if  his  intercessions  are  to  have  any  practical  efficacy?  Pray- 
ing in  ge^icral  is  not  the  key-note  of  this  system  of  worship. 
Protestants  readily  admit  that  the  saints  are  in  a  conscious  state  of 
existence,  and  that  the  departed  in  the  church  triumphant  belong  to 
the  same  mystical  body  with  those  in  the  church  militant;  but  that 
the  spirits  of  the  dead  are  accessible  to  those  of  the  living,  capable 
of  hearing  their  prayers,  knowing  their  thoughts,  and  an.swering 
their  requests,  they  can  not  admit  as  a  reason  to  inv^oke  their  inter- 
cession 7ailess  it  be  unmistakably  demonstrated  by  divine  teacJiing. 
Even  Cardinal  Cajetan  admits  that  "we  have  no  certain  knowledge 
as  to  whether  the  saints  are  aware  of  our  prayers."*  Praj'er  to 
them  is  an  act  of  worship,  but  an  untrammelled  and  unbiased  heart 
demands  a  distinct  revelation  or  an  express  injunction  for  such  an 
act  of  worship.  The  soul  does  not  want  to  be  launched  out  on  an 
ocean  of  follies  and  phantasies.  Why  should  any  one  leave  the 
known  for  the  unknown  ?  There  is  a  profound  reason  in  the  prayer 
of  that  German  unbeliever :  "  Oh,  God,  if  thou  art,  reveal  thyself 
unto  me !"  It  is  God's  nature  to  reveal  himself  to  his  pleading 
children.  But  for  how  many  centuries  already  have  devout  saint 
worshipers  fruitlessly  cried  to  some  departed  one  for  only  a  word 
from  the  unknown  !  The  eternal  silence  remains  unbroken.  "And 
Elijah  said  unto  Elisha,  Ask  what  I  shall  do  for  thee  before  I  shall 
be  taken  azuay  from  thee."'\  The  eyes  of  King  Josiah  were  not  to  see 
the  evil  coming  upon  his  nation. |  "  Thou  art  our  father  though 
Abraham  be  ignorant  of  us."§     Says  Winer:  "If  the  Romanists  are 

*  Quoted  from  his  Secund.  Secundae  by  Jenkins  on  Romanism,  194. 

f  2  Kings  ii.  9.  J  2  Kings  xxii.  20.  §  Isaiah  liii.  16. 

56 


870  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

misapprehended,  they  are  themselves  to  blame,"*  for  in  defining  their 
positions  they  use  words  which  imply  everything  Protestants  charge 
against  them.  And  the  subterfuges, f  to  which  the  Roman  clergy 
are  compelled  to  resort,  to  show  how  the  saints  may  become 
cognizant  of  the  wants  and  wishes  of  men,  is  a  virtual  confession  on 
their  part  that  nothing  is  known  or  can  be  known  in  regard  to  their 
status  in  the  unseen  world. 

III.  Saint-Worship  Degrades  the  Spiritual  Worship 

OF  God. 

"And  this,"  the  Confession  says,  "is  the  loftiest  worship  accord- 
ing to  the  word  of  God."  Consequently,  the  invocation  of  the  saints 
infringes  on  the  divine  attributes,  is  subversive  of  the  supreme 
authority  of  God,  and  undermines  the  necessity  of  spiritual  worship. 
In  the  formulation  of  systems  of  worship,  all  orthodox  churches 
agree  that  adoration  belongs  to  God  alone.  "  But  as  the  Catholic 
and  Greek  churches  in  all  formal  elements  of  their  doctrinal  system 
have  ranged  the  human  side  by  side,  yea  exalted  it  above  the  divine 
in  revelation,  so  in  this  special  part  of  their  cultus,  they  substan- 
tially present  a  human  element  for  worship  in  the  religious  veneration 
they  accord  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  saints,  images  and  relics. "|  The 
deliverances  of  the  church  on  this  subject  virtually  concede  that  it 
is  not  necessary  to  worship  God  alone.  The  Council  of  Trent 
impliedly  pronounces  refusal  to  invoke  the  saints  a  heresy,  and  the 
Protestant  precept  that  God  alone  must  be  worshipped,  a  sin.  But 
Justin  Martyr||  asks  Trypho  :  "  Do  you  think  that  any  other  one  is 
said  to  be  worthy  of  worship  and  called  Lord  and  God  in  the 
Scriptures  except  the  Maker  of  all,  and  Christ  who  by  so  many 
scriptures  was  proved  to  you  to  have  become  man?"  And  Theo- 
doret  tells  us  that  "  To  him  alone  who  is  God  we  must  bring  our 
worship."  How  these  early  Fathers  bind  all  their  thoughts  to  the 
revealed  thought  of  God!  But  no  wonder,  for  Christ  condemned 
Samaritanism  solely  on  the  ground  of  trying  to  be  independent  of 
revelation.  The  advocacy  of  saint  worship  rests  on  the  same  inde- 
pendence of  divine  teaching.  We  know  what  we  worship;  they 
think  they  know. 

*  The  Confessions  of  Christendom,  68. 

t  Dr.  Hodge  discusses  these  fully  in  "  Systematic  Theology,"  Vol.  III.,  p.  283. 

JGuericke,  230.  ||  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  I.,  232. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  87 1 

This  is  nothing  less  than  an  invasion  of  tJic  unity  and  supnDiacy 
of  God  d,nd  an  infringement  on  liis  attributes.  That  it  was  so  un- 
derstood by  the  Confessors  is  seen  in  their  opinion  that  invocation 
of  the  saints  was  antagonistic  to  the  first  Article  of  the  Confession. 
How  could  that  Article  stand,  they  ask,  if  a  multitude  of  beings 
ranged  themselves  between  the  believer  and  God?  Of  course,  these 
Confessors  were  only  fallible  men,  the  adversaries  charge,  who  con- 
structed this  doctrinal  standpoint  upon  their  own  perverted  theol- 
ogy. Let  it  be  admitted  that  in  according  to  the  Augustana  its 
rightful  place,  we  need  not  sanction  everything  its  indiscreet  ad- 
mirers and  indiscriminating  laudators  have  written.  If  it  is  not  a 
pyramid — its  foundation  article  the  Trinity,  and  its  capstone  true 
worship — it  is,  nevertheless,  a  living  organism,  a  colossal,  pyramidal 
oak ;  its  main  stem,  the  one  grand  thought,  God  in  Christ  working 
by  his  Spirit,  and  all  the  other  articles  naturally  and  rationally 
growing  out  of  that,  branch-like — and  all  these  the  essential,  evolu- 
tionary outflow  from  the  TrutJi,  eternal,  self-existent,  absolute,  as 
the  tree  itself  grows  from  the  ground  in  all  its  beauty  and  majestic 
stateliness.  When  it  speaks  here  it  only  reiterates  the  declarations 
of  God's  word,  which  tolerates  no  divided  worship.  "  Thou  shalt 
have  no  other  gods  before  me."*  "  The  Lord  thy  God  shalt  thou 
fear,  and  him  alone  shalt  thou  serve. ''f  Here  is  no  room  cither  for 
image- worship  or  hagiodulia.  Chemnitz|  concedes  to  this  argu- 
ment the  very  first  importance.  "  All  the  heathen  methods  are  false 
and  vain;  they  are  so  because  it  is  impossible  without  the  word  of 
God  and  by  the  light  of  natural  reason  alone  to  understand  true 
worship.  Hence  it  is  a  most  extraordinary  and  indescribable  bless- 
ing of  God  that  he  has  revealed  in  his  word  how  he  wishes  to 
be  invoked,  and  what  kind  of  invocation  is  acceptable  to  him." 
What  then  is  worship?  What  is  Christian  worship?  Schleier- 
macher  defines  it  thus:  "The  sum  total  of  all  actions  whereby  we 
present  ourselves  as  organs  of  God  by  means  of  the  Hoi}'  Spirit;  it 
embraces  all  the  virtues  so  far  as  manifested  in  the  dominion  of  the 
spirit  over  the  flesh. "§  Wuttke :  "  As  believing  is  taking  up  into 
our  moral  consciousness  the  ever-present  divine,  so  worshiping  is 
elevating  our  moral   consciousness   to  God."||     To  which  KoUner 

*  Exodus  XX.  5.  t  Deut.  vi.  13.  J  Examen  Con.  Tri.,  Pt.  3,  Sec.  3. 

\  Wuttke  :  Ethics,  I.,  369.  |1  Ibid.,  II.,  215. 


8/2  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

adds :  "  Unconditional  confidence  in  God  and  thankful  recognition 
and  acceptance  of  his  mercies."*  This  definition  precludes  the 
very  thought  of  intrusion  from  any  outside  claimant;  it  implies  om- 
nipotence, omniscience,  omnipresence,  infinitude  in  all  things,  as 
belonging  to  the  object  of  worship.  And  as  the  Roman  Catholic 
includes  in  his  cultus  the  Trinity  with  all  the  saints,  he  means  to 
render  the  elements  of  worship  to  all  alike,  no  matter  how  rigor- 
ously he  pleads  for  a  distinction  between  superior  and  inferior  rev- 
erence. Herbert,  in  his  beautiful  poem,  "To  all  the  Saints  and 
Angels,"  after  acknowledging  the  tempting  fascination  of  adoring 
them  and  paying  loftiest  tribute  to  the  blessed  Maid,  breaks  forth: 

"But  now  (alas),  I  dare  not ;  for  our  King 
Whom  we  do  all  joyntly  adore  and  praise 

Bids  no  such  thing  : 
And  where  his  pleasure  no  injunction  layes, 
('Tis  your  own  case)  ye  never  move  a  wing. 
All  worship  is  prerogative,  and  a  flower 
Of  his  rich  crown,  from  whom  lyes  no  appeal 

At  the  last  houre. 
Therefore  we  dare  not  from  his  garland  steal 
To  make  a  posie  for  inferiour  power."  f 

In  this  brief  poetic  offering  there  is  concentrated  the  substance  of 
divine  teaching.  Moses|  cries  out :  "  Thou,  O  Lord,  art  my  refuge," 
to  which  St.  Ambrose§  answers  :  "  Thou  alone,  O  Lord,  art  to  be 
invoked."  David||  rejoices  to  sing  "  The  Lord  is  nigh  unto  all  them 
that  call  upon  him,"  and  St.  BasilT[  replies :  "  Prayer  is  directed  not 
to  man,  but  to  God  only."  Asaph**  hears  God  say:  "  Lwill  deliver 
thee  and  thou  shalt  glorify  me."  St.  Ephraimff  rejoins  :  "To  thee 
and  none  besides  thee  do  I  make  my  petition."  To  Isaiah||  God 
says  :  "  I  am  the  Lord ;  that  is  my  name,  and  my  glory  will  I  not 
give  to  another,  neither  my  praise  to  graven  images."  "  And  this 
knowledge,"  maintains  Origen,§§  in  his  argument  against  Celsus, 
"  will  not  permit  us  to  pray  with  confidence  to  any  other  than  the 
supreme  God,  who  is  sufficient  for  all  things,  through  our  Saviour 

*  Symbolik  der  Luth.  Kir c he. 

t  Prose  and  Verse,  75.         J  Ps.  xci.  9.         §  Jenkins,  195.         ||  Ps.  cxlv.  18. 
Tf  In  libello  Maron.  **  Ps.  1.  15.         ff  Homilies.  %%  Is.  xlii.  8. 

1^  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  IV.,  544. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  873 

the  Son  of  God."     "We  dare  not  worship  those  who  are  themselves 
worshipers." 

But  to  this  representation  of  our  relation  to  the  one  supreme  and 
all-merciful  Being,  the  advocate  of  invocation  of  the  saints  rejoins  : 
"  Just  as  in  approaching  a  monarch  we  need  the  good  will  of  his 
courtiers  and  intimate  associates  for  permission  to  enter  his  pres- 
ence, so  we  need  the  heavenly  beings  around  the  King  of  Glory  to 
carry  our  petitions  into  the  sacred  presence."  "Whence  have  we," 
asks  Spiel,  "the  great  confidence  in  the  intercession  of  the  saints, 
but  in  the  untold  assurances  that  our  prayers  have  been  heard?" 
So  then  our  heavenly  Father  would  not  have  heard  them  if  it  had 
not  been  for  these  intermediate  influences  by  which  they  came  to 
the  ear  of  the  Almighty!*  It  will  be  remembered  that  heathen 
philosophy  urged  the  same  reason  for  the  invocation  of  the  Olymp- 
ian godsf — that  they  should  be  Jupiter's  courtiers  and  introduce  his 
votaries.  St.  Ambrose  in  his  exposition  of  the  first  chapter  of 
Romans,  and  St.  Augustine  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  City  of  God, 
antagonize  this  heathenism  of  saint-worship. |  Besides,  here  is 
brought  to  light  the  weakness  of  this  entire  system  of  creature- 
worship,  which  represents  God  as  an  unapproachable  potentate 
whose  clemency  can  be  secured  only  through  the  recommendation 
of  some  favorite,  and  not  of  himself  immediately.  Have  we  not 
access  to  God  through  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  is  not  this  the  dis- 
tinctive privilege  of  all  Christians  ?  The  restoration  of  this  gospel 
was  the  first  work  of  the  Lutheran  theologians.  How  then  will 
application  to  the  saints  appear  to  the  saints  themselves,  but  an  un- 
pardonable derogation  from  the  glory  of  Christ?  And  what  will 
God  himself  think  of  such  court  trickery  as  that?  Even  an  earthly 
monarch,  who  had  appointed  his  own  son  as  the  sole  means  of 
access  to  himself  and  as  the  direct  dispenser  of  his  pardons  and 
graces,  would  feci  that  recourse  to  the  servants  of  his  household,  or 
to  any  indirect  method  of  approaching  him,  would  be  a  very  grave 
affront.§  Can  we  think  less  highly  of  God  and  his  Son  as  our 
only  revealed  intercessor  in  whose  name  we  are  to  bring  our  sup- 
plications and  thanksgivings  to  the  throne  of  grace?  "This  is  the 
Christian  religion,  that  no   one  should   be   worshiped   save  the  one 

*  And  yet  Bellarmine  shows  that  God  makes  known  our  wants  to  the  saints, 
so  they  may  pray  for  us. — De  Sane.  Beat.,  Cap.  XX.,  735. 

t  Hase  :  Polemik,  310.  J  Chemnitz:  Ex.  Cone.  Trid.  Pt.  3,  Sec.  4. 

^Jenkins;  Romanism  of  Pius  VI.,  193. 


874  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

God,  because  no  one  makes  the  soul  blessed  save  the  one  God." — 
Augustine.^ 

But  furthermore,  rendering- worship  to  beings  inferior  to  the  triune 
God  opens  the  way  for  a  Christianized  Polytlicisin,  the  utter  extinc- 
tion of  which  God  was  seeking  in  all  ages  of  the  world.  In  a  pro- 
fessedly monotheistic  religion  it  supplies  the  polytheistic  wants  of 
the  soul.  Before  people  know  the  true  God  they  long  after  gods; 
their  souls  reach  out  for  a  substantial  answer  to  the  consciousness  of 
indestructibility.  There  is  a  twilight  of  immortality  in  every  rational 
being.  But  what  shall  bring  the  perfect  light  of  day?  Before  the  sun 
of  righteousness  arises,  the  dimly  glimmering  stars  of  great  heroes 
must  answer.  Something  must  fill  up  the  vast  distance  between 
humanity  and  divinity.  There  is,  therefore,  a  tendency  in  the  hu- 
man heart  to  create  arbitrary  objects  of  worship,  according  to  the 
lust  or  the  fancy  of  the  worshiper.  The  purest  element  of  heathen 
theology  is  the  deification  of  intellectual  and  moral  attributes — man- 
liness, purity,  devotion,  unstained  truthfulness,  courage,  bravery, 
fortitude.  Then  it  is  easy  enough  to  transfer  these  abstractions  to 
concrete  realities,  and  personify  one  or  the  other  in  some  separate 
human  being.  Hence  the  multiplication  of  the  Divi  among  heathen 
peoples.  In  the  paganizing  period  of  Christianity  it  was  but  na- 
tural to  imitate  the  heathen  custom.  Melanchthon  explains  that 
from  heathen  examples  the  multiplication  of  saints  arose.  Some 
building  in  Rome  which  had  at  first  been  erected  by  Agrippa  to 
the  avenging  Jupiter  and  his  satellites  was  afterwards  rededicated  by 
the  Roman  bishop  to  Mary  and  all  the  martrys ;  the  ancient  Roman 
Pantheon  became  the  modern  Christian  Pantheon:  the  saints  were 
considered  Christianized  heroes  and  semi-deified  human  beings  in 
precisely  the  old  heathen  style.  In  the  Libri  Carolini  beatification 
is  made  indentical  with  deification — canonizing  "the  faithful"  the 
same  thing  as  elevating  the  emperors  to  the  position  of  Tlicoi.^ 
Canonization  is  only  another  name  for  apotheosis,  with  only  this 
difference  :  In  the  latter  case  it  was  the  exaltation  of  the  emperor  to 
the  gods,  in  the  former  the  elevation  included  the  humblest  and 
poorest  who  had  been  washed  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  and  whose 
lives  had  been  adored  by  Christian  virtues. J 

Mantuanus  observes  that  just  as  the  Latins  invoked  Mars  to  aid 
in  military  enterprises,  Castor  and    Pollux  to  take  knight  errantry 

*Vera  Religione,  cap.  55.  f  Neander.  JHase;  Polemik,  310. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  875 

under  their  patronage,  and  Juno  to  be  the  protectress  from  fevers,  so 
Saint  Anna  is  a  refuge  in  storms,  Sebastian  from  pestilence,  Florian 
from  fire;  Saints  George  and  Martin  are  the  tutelaries  of  the  Ger- 
mans ;  Saints  Paul  and  Peter  of  the  Romans.  As  the  custom  of 
calling  upon  the  patron  saint  grows  in  practice,  the  worship  of  Jesus 
falls  into  the  back-ground  if  not  entire  neglect.  And  that  this  asser- 
tion is  not  a  perversion  of  the  facts  is  plain  enough  from  the  nu- 
merous instances  of  which  the  following  are  examples.  A  Tyrolese 
mountaineer  placed  this  inscription  over  the  door  of  his  house; 
"  Holy  Florian,  defend  this  house  from  fire."  And  a  citizen  of 
Vienna  painted  on  the  gable  of  his  dwelling:  "This  house  stood 
formerly  in  the  hand  of  God  ;  he  allowed  it  to  burn  away;  now  it  is 
conunitted  to  St.  Florian's  care."  If  these  examples  seem  somewhat 
ordinary  and  ludicrous,  as  Hase  facetiously  intimates,  then  the  fact 
that  I'rancis  of  Assisi  praised  the  legend  :  "  My  saint  hears  whom 
God  docs  not','  borders  on  the  sacrilegious.  Yet  this  is  the  inevi- 
table consequence  of  placing  a  creature  before  the  Creator.  Pure 
monotheism  cuts  the  roots  of  all  polytheizing  tendencies.  Is 
there  any  unfairness  in  thus  stating  the  case?  Suppose  that  on 
some  morning  when  all  the  worshipers  had  left  the  cathedral  a  mono- 
theist  from  some  other  sphere  should  quietly  enter  it,  pick  up  the 
prayer  book,  and  see  the  ora  pro  nobis  to  scores  of  beings  with  hu- 
man names,  should  see  in  the  pictures  which  adorn  the  walls  the 
figure  of  a  crowned  woman  with  a  child  in  her  arms  and  prostrate 
penitents  about  her,  should  examine  the  marble  statutes  on  all  sides 
with  evidences  of  superhuman  reverence  being  paid  them,  what 
would  be  his  reflections?  The  pagans  and  Manicheans  reproached 
the  saint-worshipers  centuries  ago  for  deifying  human  beings.  Until 
the  9th  century  the  churches  had  only  one  altar.  But  the  learned 
papal  bishop  Nicolas  of  Cusa  accused  the  Italians  of  substituting 
saints  for  the  old  Latin  gods. 

Possibly  the  Arian  controversy  is  indirectly  responsible,  in  part  at 
least,  for  this  polytheizing  tendency  in  worship.  The  divine  of  the 
Saviour's  personality  was  exalted  at  the  expense,  of  the  human. 
The  idea  of  the  God-man  was  too  much  lost  sight  of  in  the  attempted 
identification  of  his  nature  with  the  unseen  and  incomprehensible 
Deity.  Hence  Christ  became  the  object  of  a  remoter,  a  more  awful 
adoration.     Says    Milman:*    "The    mind    began    to   seek    out,    or 

*  History  of  Christiany  :  Book  IV.,  425. 


8/6  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

eagerly  to  seize  some  other  more  material  beings  in  closer  alliance 
with  human  sympathies.  The  constant  propensity  of  man  to  human- 
ize his  deity,  readily  clung  with  its  devotion  to  humbler  objects. 
The  weak  wing  of  the  common  mind  could  not  soar  to  the  unap- 
proachable light  in  which  Christ  dwelt  with  the  Father:  it  dropped 
to  the  earth  and  bowed  itself  down  before  some  less  mysterious  and 
less  infinite  object  of  veneration."  What  then?  Is  the  weakness 
of  faith  in  the  only  true  God  and  the  slovenliness  of  materializing 
propensites  an  excuse  for  turning  away  from  the  Supreme  Ruler  and 
fixing  the  heart's  devotions  upon  the  works  of  his  hands?  They 
who  would  remain  faithful  to  the  ancient  creed  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  every  age  dare  not  divide  their  worship  between  the 
Creator  and  the  creature.  Says  Dante:*  "Invoking  the  saints  is 
false  worship.  In  Christ  alone  is  our  salvation."  "  And  when  thou 
prayest  thou  shalt  say :  Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven."  "  The 
Lord  is  nigh  unto  all  them  that  call  upon  him."t 

3.  If  tJiey  divide  their  woj-sJup  they  become  guilty  of  idolatry.  To 
this  conclusion  we  are  reluctantly  but  inevitably  driven  by  a  script- 
ural, rational  and  practical  study  of  this  subject.  It  is  noteworthy 
to  remark  that  the  Confessors  in  the  true  spirit  of  conciliation  at  first 
hesitated  to  press  the  charge  of  idolatry  against  Rome,  but  in  the 
later  symbols,  the  growing  superstition  is  severely  handled.  The 
Apology  in  discussing  the  belief  in  special  saints  as  the  patrons  of 
certain  civil  employments  and  avocations,  calls  it  a  "  shameful  heathen 
lie  "I  and  in  the  Smalcald  Articles  the  entire  practice  of  invoking 
the  saints  is  declared  to  be"  idolatry. '"§  Much  stronger  language  is 
used  at  other  places,  but  nothing  in  the  Lutheran  symbols  can  com- 
pare with  the  expressions  employed  in  the  Helvetic  and  Gallic  Con- 
fessions. Indeed,  Calvinism  allows  hagiolatry  no  ground  of  justifi- 
cation whatever,  and  calls  it  a  deception  of  the  devil. ||  Neander 
states  that  here  is  to  be  found  one  of  the  causes  of  the  rise  of 
Mohammedanism — the  original  adherents  considering  Mariolatry 
equivalent  to  idolatry. 

In  view  of  such  facts  and  others,  numerous  attempts  have  been 
made  by  Rome  to  modify  and  explain  the  nature  of  this  fundamental 
element  of  its  system.     The  explicit  statements  of  God's  word,  for- 

*  Neander.       f  Ps.  cxlv.  18.     •  ^  Mueller,  Sym.  Biicher,  229.       §  Ibid,  305. 
II  Gall.  Conf.,  Art.  24.     See  also  Zockler,  172  ;  Hase,  307,  and  Guericke,  239. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  877 

bidding  even  the  faintest  and  apparently  innocent  manifestations  of 
a  depreciated  worship  of  God  ;  the  positive  denunciations  by  the 
apostoHc  and  early  church  fathers  against  polytheistic  tendencies  in 
prayer;  the  rigorous  opposition  on  the  part  of  pious  and  influential 
Catholics  against  the  introduction  of  intermediate  objects  of  venera- 
tion and  the  disastrous  practical  consequences,  all  have  had  more  or 
less  influence  with  Rome  in  vindicating  the  "  invocation  of  the 
saints."  Indeed  it  has  become  necessary  for  the  clergy  to  apologize 
for  it  and  extenuate  its  results,  rather  than  set  up  a  practical  defense. 
This  is  especially  true  in  regard  to  the  charge  of  idolatry. 

Conscious  of  the  justice  and  seriousness  of  this  imputation,  the 
Roman  Curia  has  given  the  name  of  relative  or  indirect  worship  to 
this  cultus,  a  worship  which  will  begin  with  inferior,  but  ultimately 
terminate  in  God  as  the  final  object  of  adoration.  It  draws  the  sub- 
tle distinction  between  the  worship  of  God  and  that  of  the  saints  by 
pointing  out  the  infinite  interval  between  the  saints  and  the  King  of 
the  saints.  Bellarmine*  receives  the  credit  of  amplifying  and  of- 
ficially formulating  the  differences  which  Augustine  is  believed  to 
have  originated  in  his  rules  on  "  reverencing  the  martrys."  Three 
degrees  of  worship  are  specified:  first,  doiilia,  that  which  is  an  in- 
ferior kind  of  worship  and  due  to  the  saints  and  angels  ;  it  is  more 
than  human  and  less  than  divine  ;  secondly,  hyperdonlia — a  word  of 
comparative  recent  coinage  to  describe  the  nature  of  the  veneration 
to  be  shown  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  a  form  of  worship  loftier  than  the 
doulia;  and  thirdly,  latria,  which  signifies  supreme  worship  and  is 
applicable  to  God  alone.  Augustine  calls  the  first  of  these  forms 
civil  tvorship — adtum  civilein  sue  cultinn  charitatis  ac  societatis,  and 
the  latter  he  calls  religious  zvorship,  cultuui  religiouis,  and  maintains 
that  all  forms  ^xq  per  inajorem  gloriani  Dei.^ 

But  there  is  not  sufficient  clearness  and  force  in  these  theoretical 
distinctions — the  ordinary  mind  will  not  grasp  them.  Besides,  the 
Scrij^tures  defend  only  one  kind  of  worship  ;  the  words  adoration 
and  invocation  are  used  interchangeably  in  reference  to  the  same 
object;  invoking  and  adoring  are  applicable  in  a  like  sense;  there 
is  nowhere   any  divine  authority  to   teach   adoration   of  God   and 

*  Guericke  :  Christliche  Symbolik,  243. 

t  For  the  most  lucid  elaboration  of  this  matter  to  be  found  anywhere,  see 
Carpzov;  Isagoge  in  iibros  symbolicos,  539. 


SyS  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

invocation  of  saints  as  an  evidence  that  the  higher  reverence  is  ac- 
corded to  the  former.  Says  Hopkins  in  his  exposition  of  the  first 
commandment:  "Withhold  the  worship  from  the  saints,  and  all 
other  honors  rendered  them  will  speedily  fall  away."  This  succinct, 
but  axiomatic  truth  settles  the  whole  question  of  graduated  steps  in 
devotion  between  the  creature  and  the  Creator.  But  the  design  of 
keeping  up  these  distinctions  is  to  show  that  in  worshiping  the 
saints  God  is  worshiped  supremely  and  the  saints  inferiorly. 
This  removes  the  objection  of  idolatry,  it  is  thought.  But  the  same 
process  of  reasoning  would  prove  that  the  heathen  who  adored 
Jupiter  as  the  one  supreme — the  father  of  all — yet  invoked  "lords 
many  and  gods  many  "  of  minor  and  inferior  greatness,  were  not 
idolaters.  Yet  the  Bible  expressly  condemns  as  idolatrous  all  the 
ancient  polytheisms  which  acknowledged  a  subordination  in  the 
sphere  of  deity,  and  yet  placed  over  all  the  minor  and  secondary 
divinities,  one  supreme  God — the  creator  of  all  things.*  It  broadly 
and  practically  argues  that  such  divinities  are  gods,  and  to  worship 
them  was  to  render  divine  homage.  Dr.  Hodgef  argues  very  con- 
clusively that  any  homage,  internal  or  external,  which  involves  the 
ascription  of  divine  attributes  to  its  object,  if  that  object  be  a  creat- 
ure, is  idolatrous.  And  thus  the  homage  paid  by  Catholics  to  the 
Virgin  and  the  saintly  host  is  a  question  of  fact  and  not  of  theory. 
Puseyl  relates  that  a  friend  of  his  was  asked  to  offer  a  prayer  to  the 
Virgin  Mary  in  exactly  the  same  language  which  we  address  to  the 
Holy  Trinity.  The  reader  of  Roman  Catholic  literature  will  be 
astonished  to  find  so  many  illustrations  confirmatory  of  this.  Yet 
Cardinal  Nevvman§  insists  that  idolatry  is  :  "  regarding  and  wor- 
shiping a  being  as  one  and  the  supreme  God,  which  ts  not;  but 
any  other  worship  is  not  idolatry,  even  though  we  regard  a  saint  as 
a  secondary  divinity  '  all  but '  the  one  and  supreme  God."  We  can 
only  ask  the  devout  and  learned  defender  of  "  Mary  and  all  the 
saints,"  what  then  shall  we  make  of  the  fact  that  there  has  been  in 
all  ages  an  idolatry  which  has  not  answered  his  definition,  though 
Scripture,  history,  reason  and  common  sense  have  all  so  designated 
it  from  the  creation  of  the  world?     It  is  much   easier  to  construct 

*See  this  idea  admirably  discussed  by  Mozley ;  Theory  of  Development,  67. 
t  Systematic  Theology,  III,,  281.  ^Eirenicon,  106. 

^Development  of  Doctrine. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  879 

theories  from  the  teachings  of  history,  than  to  fit  the  teachings  of 
history  into  theories  evolved  from  one's  own  consciousness. 

And  here  the  burden  of  tlie  argument  may  rest.  Let  it  be 
admitted  that  theoretical  distinctions  can  be  preserved  in  the 'canons 
of  oecumenical  councils  and  papal  decrees:  are  they  practical?  Even 
if  we  were  compelled  to  admit  the  reasons  Romanists  urge  as  suffi- 
cient to  establish  distinctions  of  worship,  history  shows  that  practi- 
cally the  passing  from  invocation  to  adoration  is  speedy  and  easy 
and  hagiolatry  soon  becomes  idolatry;*  and  the  proof  is  abundant 
that  countless  Catholics  in  all  circumstances  of  life  apply  much 
quicker  to  the  Virgin  and  the  saints  than  to  the  Father  and  the 
Son.  And  why  not?  It  is  so  attractive  to  human  nature.  Besides, 
what  worshiper  can  keep  in  mind  the  varieties  of  prayer  demanded 
by  the  three-fold  form  of  devotion?  As  soon  as  h^  approaches  the 
object  of  his  devotions,  intellectual  distinctions  must  absolutely 
vanish.  You  may  convey  to  the  ear  the  separate  idea  of  latria, 
doidia  and  hyperdoulia,  but  you  can  not  convey  it  to  the  heart  of 
the  worshiper.  What  answer  would  the  devout  Romanist  of  Italy, 
or  Spain,  or  even  France,  give  to  your  question  as  to  how  he  dis- 
tributed his  worship  this  morning  between  his  patron  saint,  the 
Virgin  Mary,  and  the  Deity?  His  very  ignorance  and  simplicity 
would  be  the  strongest  argument  against  the  hair-splitting  discrimi- 
nations in  worship.  At  least  the  common  people  are  unable  to 
reconcile  the  de  fide  teachings  of  the  church  and  the  pious  opinions 
obtained  from  popular  instruction. f 

Yet  the  saint  worshiper  strenuously  contends  that  the  homage  he 
pays  to  angels  and  the  spirits  of  the  departed  is  an  indirect  exalta- 
tion of  God  and  promotion  of  the  glory  of  Christ ;  these  created 
beings  are  the  reflection  of  divine  majesty,  the  halo  around  the 
brow  of  Divinity,  and  when  he  beholds  them  by  faith  he  stands  in 
awe  before  the  Deity  himself,  in  adoring  the  heavenly  host  he  ac- 
cords the  ultimate  thoughts  of  his  devotion  to  Him  alone.  We 
may  answer  him  after  the  sublime  manner  of  Arnobius,|  in  his  mas- 
terly defence  of  Christianity  against  the  heathenism  of  the  third  and 
fourth  centuries:  "  If  you  cannot  prove  irrefutably  that  these  saints 
(gods)  are  what  you  represent  them  to  be,  why  do  you  ask  us  to 
worship  them?     We  want  to  know  whom  we  worship.     If  they  are 

*  Zockler,  170.  fP'^sey:  Eirenicon,  12. 

X  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  Vol.  VI.,  464. 


88o  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

what  you  tell  us  of  them,  why  do  you  not  prove  it  to  us  from  the 
eternal  principles  of  reason  and  common  sense?  And  if  that  is  true 
which  you  affirm  of  them,  namely,  that  they  have  sprung  from  the 
Supreme  Being  and  are  a  part  of  him,  why  do  you  ask  of  us  the 
idle  task  of  approaching  one  or  each  of  them  personally,  since  it  is 
His  good  pleasure  that  we  should  take  hold  of  the  divine  himself? 

The  supreme  Deity  suffices  us — the  Creator  and  Lord  of  the  uni- 
verse, who  orders  and  rules  all  things;  in  whom  we  serve  all  that 
requires  our  service;  in  him  we  worship  all  that  should  be  adored, 
and  venerate  all  that  demands  the  homage  of  our  reverence."  Even 
long  before  (A.  D.  iio),  Tatian*  had  said:  "  Man  is  to  be  honored 
as  a  fellow-man ;  but  God  alone  is  to  be  reverenced."  Here  are  the 
seeds  of  Athanasius'  adamantine  argument,  which  assails  the  idea  of 
inferior  worship  in  the  Church  of  Rome  with  as  crushing  a  force  as 
it  did  the  Arians  when  he  convicted  them  of  idolatry  in  the  worship 
of  Christ  as  a  creature:  "  Ye  have  two  gods — the  uncreated  and  a 
created — one  begotten  and  the  other  unbegotten." 

Finally,  saint-worship  is  dangerous  because  it  is  destructive  of 
sound  morality.  The  logical  sequence  of  the  argumentation  of  our 
Confession  points  out  this  practical  result.  Not  to  say,  that  the 
practice  it  condemns  endangers  our  salvation — that  is  a  foregone 
conclusion — but  that  it  undermines  and  eventually  destroys  the  prin- 
ciples called  for  by  a  pure  code  of  morals.  This  is  not  a  question 
of  speculative  theology  or  metaphysics,  but  of  history,  which  must 
decide  in  how  far  the  morality  of  a  people  suffers  from  the  inter- 
mingling of  the  names  of  the  departed  in  their  devotions.  Dr. 
Newman,  by  a  priori  reasoning,  seeks  to  prove  that  the  carnal  mind 
will  not  be  led  to  the  worship  of  God  if  the  worship  of  saints  is  for- 
bidden. But  St.  Paulf  is  against  him.  Admit  co-ordinate  divinities, 
and  the  same  consequences  will  follow  in  professedly  Christian  de- 
votion which  followed  the  forsaking  of  the  Supreme  Being  in  Gentile 
worship.  Only  the  in-dwelling  of  God  in  the  soul  can  arrest  the 
downward  tendency  induced  by  original  sin.  The  object  of  faith 
and  veneration  must  be  both  almighty  and  immaculate.  This  is  the 
dictum  of  universal  experience,  and  not  the  dictum  of  a  system. 
And  probably  the  least  objectionable  feature  is  that  the  invocation 
of  the  saints  inspires  and  encourages  the  tendency  toward  a  mere 

*  Ibid,  II.,  66,   Contra  Arian.  f  Rom.  i.  23,  24. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  88 1 

se?isuous  worship,  which,  if  it  does  not  behttle  the  faculties  of  the 
soul,  does  not  quicken  and  ennoble  them. 

Gibbons*  admits  that  a  heart  tenderly  attached  to  the  saints  will 
give  vent  to  its  feelings  in  the  language  of  hyperbole,  just  as  an  en- 
thusiastic lover  will  call  his  future  bride  his  adorable  queen,  without 
any  intention  of  worshiping  her  as  a  goddess.  But  can  such  a  senti- 
mcntalism  be  acceptable  to  Christ?  It  borders  on  the  offensive,  and 
the  learned  Cardinal  knows  full  well  that  even  the  worship  of  Mary 
has  often  nothing  exalting  in  it.  Some  of  the  invocations  addressed 
to  her  are  shocking  in  their  suggestiveness.f  It  seems  almost  irrev- 
erent to  detract  in  any  way  from  the  honor  of  the  mother  of  our 
Lord,  but  if  she  be  conscious  of  some  of  the  silly  contemplations 
which  have  been  written  about  her  in  the  name  of  religion,  the  spot- 
less purity  of  her  noble  womanhood  must  revolt  with  indignation. 

Saints  usurp  the  place  of  Christ  in  the  soul ;  they  are  so  much 
easier  of  access,  so  much  easier  to  conciliate,  so  much  more  tolerant 
of  human  weakness,  so  much  more  ready  to  make  allowance  for 
broken  law.  Thus  not  only  are  the  elements  of  divine  worship  ob- 
literated, but  the  personal  efforts  at  holiness  neglected  by  those  who 
expect  their  patron  saints  to  accomplish  for  them  the  needed  restor- 
ation. As  in  the  days  of  Deborah,;};  "the  highways  are  unoccupied, 
and  the  travelers  walk  through  the  by-ways."  It  is  the  demand  of 
true  Christianity  to  walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Jesus,  but  there  are  not 
a  few  people  of  doubtful  morality,  who,  rather  than  do  this  one'duty, 
will  undertake  to  do  more  than  their  duty.  True,  the  devout 
Romanist  will  ask  whethei  saint-worshipers  are  not  better  church- 
goers than  their  opponents ;  whether  art  has  not  received  the  im- 
petus of  its  wonderful  development  from  the  opportunities  offered 
to  sculpture  and  painting  by  the  cultus  he  defends;  whether  the 
rich  variety  in  the  history  of  the  saints,  as,  for  instance,  the  innocent 
sweetness  of  St.  Agnes,  the  captivating  beauty  of  a  Magdalene,  the 
holy  earnestness  of  the  dying  Jerome,  have  not  had  a  most  potent 
influence  upon  the  mind  and  heart  of  human  society;  whether  the 
countless  instances  of  ecclesiastical  monuments,  erected  in  memory 
of  a  mother,  a  child,  a  brother,  a  friend,  have  not  dotted  many  lands 
with  the  grandest  churches,  chapels  and  monasteries  ?  Would  the 
worship  of  the  saints,  then,  weaken  devotion  to  the  Saviour?    Would 

*  Faith  of  our  Fathers,  182.  f  Edgar's  Variations  of  Popery.  547. 

J  Judges  V.  6. 


882  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

the  honors  paid  to  the  mother  of  Christ  detract  from  the  reverence 
due  her  Son?  Protestants  will  admit  the  premise,  but  the  conclu- 
sion does  not  follow.  Suppose  saint-worship  does  contain  much 
that  is  beautiful,  and  has  given  a  powerful  impulse  to  the  plastic  arts : 
the  gods  and  goddesses  of  Greece  were  thought  to  be  far  more 
beautiful  and  found  far  more  beautiful  exemplification  in  art,  never- 
theless her  religion  was  stamped  from  the  beginning  with  the  sure 
marks  of  mutabilit}',  corruption  and  decay. 

Aside  from  the  express  teaching  of  God's  word — by  the  admoni- 
tion to  worship  God  alone  and  by  the  prohibition  not  to  divide 
allegiance — the  question  must  be  decided  by  the  testimony  of  fact, 
not  conjecture  or  presumption.  We  may  assert  in  all  charitableness 
to  Catholic  Christians  that  the  ravages  of  unbelief  and  corrupt 
morality  are  greatest  where  adoration  of  the  saints  is  made  most 
prominent.  One  most  notable  phase  was  already  remarkable  in  and 
prior  to  the  days  of  the  Reformers.  It  was  a  vast  channel  for  the 
enrichment  of  the  Church.  The  popes  turned  the  sale  of  the  works 
of  the  saints,  their  bones  and  other  relics,  into  a  most  lucrative 
trade.  Wickcliffe  had  said:  "Avarice  lies  at  the  root  of  the  prac- 
tice," and  Luther,  with  his  idiomatic  vigor,  replied  :  "  The  pope* 
has  reaped  an  immense  revenue  from  the  traffic ;  when  once  no 
more  aid  can  be  gained  from  them,  they  will  soon  be  allowed  to 
rest."  It  is  notorious  to-day  that  Rome  makes  as  good  a  merchan- 
dise out  of  the  relics  of  Christian  martyrs  as  do  the  Egyptians  out 
of  the  mummies  of  heathen  Pharaohs  and  Potiphars.f  "  If  thou 
wilt  help  me  to  the  realization  of  my  ambition,  I  will  canonize  thee," 
said  Pope  Benedict  XIV.  to  an  object  of  his  veneration. | 

This  is  not  an  accidental  or  necessary  outgrowth  of  the  practice 
in  a  particular  age  or  country.  History,  past  and  present,  marshals 
its  evidence.  In  the  Abyssinian  or  Ethiopian  Church,  where  the  wor- 
ship of  the  saints  was  the  most  conspicuous  element  of  Christianity, 
the  immorality  was  notorious  and  shocking  in  the  extreme. §  Claus 
Harms  ||  in  replying  to  the  question  whether  the  final  abolition  of 
this  practice  from  the  German  churches  had  enhanced  the  moral 
status  of  the  people,  unhesitatingly  asserts  that  especially  two  virtues 
of  the  Christian  faith,  industry  and   chastity,  had  largely  increased. 

*  De  Missa  :  Mueller,  305.  t  Miracles  and  Saints,  93. 

X  Hase;  Polemik,  301.  |  Herzog  :  I.,  48.  ||  Augs.  Conf.,  218. 


INVOCATION    OF    THE    SAINTS.  883 

Dr.  Greenwald*  gives  an  alarming  picture  of  the  country  where  this 
fundamental  element  of  Roman  Catholicism  has  untrammeled  sway. 
Dr.  Puseyt  says,"  It  is  notorious  that  this  system  is  the  great  barrier 
to  Christian  union,  and  the  ground  of  alienation  of  pious  minds  in 
England."  The  piety  of  the  Church  of  England  cannot  affiliate 
with  the  state  of  moralit}'  in  English  Romanism!  What  a  com- 
mentary on  the  lugubrious  lamentations  of  Faber:  "  Here  in  Eng- 
land Mary  is  not  half  enough  preached;  Jiencc  it  is  tJiat  Jesus  is  not 
loved X  that  heretics  are  not  converted,  that  the  Church  is  not 
exalted ;  that  souls  which  might  be  saints,  wither  and  dwindle. 
Thousands  of  sculs  perisJi  because  Mary  is  wiihheld  from  ihemy^ 
And  all  this  because  of  the  sensitiveness  of  the  nation  in  regard  to 
the  honor  and  glory  of  Jesus.  What  is  the  significance  of  a  com- 
parison between  South  America,  Mexico,  or  even  Spain  and  Italy, 
where  the  worship  of  the  saints  has  unhindered  play,  with  England, 
and  Germany,  and  the  United  States,  where  it  is  checked  by  what 
Faber  calls  "  the  sneers  of  heresy." 

It  has  been  intimated  in  high  circles  and  on  ex catJiedra  assurance 
that  the  definition  of  the  Cultus  Sanctorum  was  as  necessary  in  the 
sixteenth  century  as  was  that  of  the  Honioousion  in  the  fourth  ;  but 
this  examination  of  Article  XXI.  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  shows 
that  there  is  no  similarity  between  a  trjitJi  which  had  from  the  first 
been  believed  by  all  except  acknowledged  heretics,  and  a  practice 
which  was  not  observed  by  the  successors  of  the  apostles;  had  no 
definite  and  uniform  advocacy  among  the  Church  Fathers ;  was 
always  arraigned  by  some  of  the  most  spiritual  men  of  the  Church; 
had  persistent  opponents  at  the  Council  of  Constance  ;  was  assailed 
in  the  ante-Tridentine  theology,  repudiated  and  condemned  by 
many  of  the  representative  men  of  the  Romish  Communion  ;  and, 
above  all,  is  contrary  to  the  word  of  God,  derogatory  to  the  glory 
of  the  Redeemer,  repugnant  to  the  spiritual  worship  of  God,  per- 
vaded with  the  evils  of  polytheism  and  idolatry,  and  has  no  founda- 
tion in  reason  and  morality. 

Indeed,  the  cardinal  doctrine  so  bravely  defended  by  the  Confes- 
sors finds  a  vivid  illustration  in  a  saying  prevalent  among  the  country 
people  of  Suabia,  that  immediately  before  death  each  Catholic  must 
become  Protestant — Evangelische  ;  after  extreme  unction  the  priest 

*  Luth.  Ch.  Rev.,  V.,  11.  f  Eirenicon,  108. 

X  The  italics  are  Faber's.  \  Ibid,  1 1 5. 


884  AUGSBURG    CONFESSION. 

discloses  to  the  dying  the  need  of  an  implicit  trust  in  Jesus,  because 
all  hope  in  the  saints  is  a  delusion.  And  this  accords  with  the 
dying  testimony  of  Augustine,*  who  suddenly  broke  forth  in  his 
last  moments,  as  if  a  revalation  had  come  to  him  from  another 
world  :  "  Now  at  last  I  have  learned  that  the  heavenly  Father  hears 
the  prayers  of  his  believing  children."  And  that  is  the  real  "  com- 
munion of  saints,"  when  all  believers  in  the  Triune  God  join  with 
the  angel§  and  the  saints  in  worshiping  him  in  spirit  and  truth,  who 
rules  in  heaven  and  on  earth — our  Creator,  Preserver  and  Redeemer. 

*  Apologia  :  Mueller,  229. 


INDEX. 


Ability,  Human,  56,  703. 

Advent,  Second,  106,  627,  684. 

Annihilation  of  Wicked,  676. 

Antinomianism,  208,  801. 

Arianism,  11,  22. 

Arminianism,  in  Relation  to  Faith,  143. 

Art  in  Worship,  571. 

Ascension  of  Christ,  105. 

Atonement,  38,  94. 

Attributes,  Divine,  27. 

Augsburg  Confession,  586, 

Authorship  of,  69. 

Occasion  of,  70. 
Augustinianism,  703. 

Baptism,  Lecture  on,  256. 

Institution  of,  257. 

Constituent  parts  of,  257 

Validity  of,  259. 

Mode  of,  259. 

Infants,  Proper  Subjects  of,  261,  445. 

A  Means  of  Grace,  268. 

Effects  of,  272. 

Effects  of,  upon  Infants,  277. 

Necessity  of,  300. 

Only  Wilful  Neglect  of,  Condemns, 
52,  300. 
Baptismal  Regeneration,  272. 

Call  to  the  Ministry,  Lecture  on,  451. 

See  167. 
Capital  Punishment,  605. 
Cause  of  Sin,  Lecture  on,  726. 
Chiliasm,  678. 
Christ,  Person  and  Work  of,  Lecture 

on,  68. 
Christology,  77. 


Christian  Year,  560. 
Church,  Lecture  on,  215. 
Church  as  it  is,  Lecture  on,  227. 

Necessity    of   Membership    in,   220, 
237- 

A  Visible  Organization  of  True  Be- 
lievers, 231. 

As  Invisible  and  \'isible,  234. 

Administers  the  Means  of  Grace,  236. 

Not  Perfected  in  this  World,  243. 

True  and  False  Distinguished,  246. 

The  Communion  of  Saints,  231. 

Divine  and  Human  Factors  in,  547. 

And  State,  Relation  between,  573. 

In  what  sense  no  Salvation  outside  of, 
238. 

Future  of.  Lecture  on,  627. 

Orders,  Lecture  on,  451. 
Civil  Polity  and  Government,  Lecture 

on,  588. 
Confession,  Lecture  on,  356. 

Design  of,  363. 

Benefit  of,  376. 
Confession,  Augsburg,  586. 
Confessions  of  Faith,  582. 
Confirmation,  304.  * 

Congregationalism,  575. 
Conservation  of  the  Faith  of  the  Church, 

582. 
Consubstantiation  Rejected,  348. 
Council  of  Nice,  1 1. 
Conversion,  718. 
Conversion  of  the  Jews,  686. 
Creation,  733. 
Creationism,  54. 
Creeds,  subject  to  Change,  13. 

Necessity  and  Limitation  of,  582. 
SS5 


886 


INDEX. 


Culture  and  Religion,  211. 
Cultus,  Principles  of,  567. 

Day  of  Judgment,  Duration  of,  684. 
Depravity,  Total  and  Universal,  102. 
Divine  Service,  Times  of,  556. 
Doctrinal  Basis  of  the  General  Synod, 

585. 

Earth  Renovated,  the  Eternal  Abode 

of  the  Saints,  663. 
Election,  707,  720. 
Episcopacy,  574,  578. 
Eschatology,  Lecture  on,  627. 

See  103. 
Eternal  Life,  655. 

Degrees  of  Blessedness  in,  661. 
Eternal  Punishment,  663. 
Eunomians,  22. 
Evil,  Origin  of,  Lecture  on,  726. 

Faith,  Justification  by.  Lecture  on,  107. 

Nature  of,  135,  821. 

And  Works,  Relation  between.  Lec- 
ture on,  767.     See  644. 

Of  the  Church,  Conservation  of,  582. 
Free  Will,  Lecture  on,  687. 
Fundamental     Doctrine,     the    Lord's 

Supper  a,  335.    See  583. 

General  Synod's  Order  of  Woi'ship,  569. 

Doctrinal  Basis,  585. 
God,  Unity  of  His  Divine  Essence,  15, 
24. 

Trinity  of  Persons  in  the   Godhead, 

15.25. 

*\ttributes  of,  27. 
Good  Works,  Necessity  of,  187. 

Lecture  on,  767. 

The  Result  of  Faith,  189. 

Nature  and  Limitation  of,  191. 

Ground  of  Obligation  to  Do,  199. 

Rewarded,  805. 
Government,  Civil,  Lecture  on,  5S8. 

Theories  of,  592. 

Rights  and  Duties  of  Subjects,  599. 

Lawfulness     of    Christians    to    hold 
Civil  Office,  601. 


Punishment  of  Offenders  Justifiable, 

604. 
Constitution  and  Administration  of, 

in  the  Church,  573. 
Specific  Forms  of,  in  the  Church,  574. 
Grace,  Divine,  703. 

Hades,  Christ's  Descent  into,  103. 
Heaven,  a  Locality,  662. 

Degrees  of  Blessedness  in,  661. 
Hell,  Christ's  Descent  into,  103. 
Holy  Spirit,  Procession  of,   from    the 

Father  and  the  Son,  16. 
Human  Ordinances    in    the    Church, 

Lecture  on,  546. 

Image  of  God,  714. 

Incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God,  37,  71. 

Infallibility,  Papal,  578. 

Infant  Baptism.  261-,  445. 

Invocation  of  Saints,   Lecture  on,  834. 

Jews,  Conversion  of,  686. 
Judgment  Day,  106. 
Duration  of,  684. 
Judgment,  Final,  106,  627. 
Justification,  source  of,  120. 
Ground  of,  121. 
Nature  of,  128. 
Its  Relation  to  Faith,  133. 
By  Faith,  Lecture  on,  107. 
By  Faith  alone,  102. 
By  Faith  alone.  Condemned  by  the 

Roman  Church,  102,  553. 
By  Faith  alone  does  not  Encourage 
Immorality,    783,    791  ;    nor  Anti- 
nomianism,  801. 
By  our  own  Merit  Impossible,  108. 
By  Faith,  as  Taught  in  other  Con- 
fessions, 139. 
Errors,  Concerning,  145. 

Keys,  Power  of.  Belongs  to  the  Church, 
162,  374. 

Last  Things,  Lecture  on,  627.  See  103. 
Lay  Preaching,  473. 
Life  Eternal,  655. 


INDEX. 


SSy 


Logos,  Signification  of,  71. 

Lord's  Day,  Ground  of  Obligation  for 

its  Observance,  556. 
Lord's  Supper,  Lecture  on,  326. 

Distinctive  Views  of,  331. 

Transubstantiation  Rejected,  331. 

Consubstantiation  Rejected,  348. 

Views   of  Calvin   and   Zwingli  Re- 
jected, 333,  343. 

A  Fundamental  Doctrine,  335. 

A  Real  Presence  of  the  True  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  in,  334. 

Oral  Reception  of  the  Body  and  Blood 
of  Christ  in,  350. 

The  Doctrine  of  the  Early  Church, 

354- 
Lutheran  form  of  Church  Government, 
580. 

Mahometans,  23. 
Manichaeans,  20. 
Marburg  Articles,  7. 
Marriage,  618. 

Means  of  Grace,  Validity  and  Efficacy 
of,  239. 

Sacraments  as,  417,  447. 
Millennarianism,  678. 
Millennium,  247,  689. 
Ministry,  Office  of,  Lecture  on,  147. 
Divinely  appointed,  155. 
Design  of,  157. 
Not  Self- Perpetuating,  158. 
Call  to,  158,  451. 
Participation  of  Laity  in  the  Call  to, 

165. 
Harmony  of  Protestant  Confessions 

Concerning  Call  to,  458. 
Testimony  yf  Scriptures  Concerning 

the  Call  to,  461. 
Testimony  of  the  Dogmaticians,  466. 
Functions  of,  may  be  Exercised  by 
Laity  in  case  of  Necessity,  158; 
yet  Ordinarily  and  Publicly  only 
by  these,  rightly  called,  167,  458, 

473- 
Qualifications  for,  473. 
Woman  not  Called  to,  486. 


Inner  Call  to,  487-493. 

Ordination  to,  493. 

Llnworthiness   of  the    Minister  does 

not  Invalidate  the  Means  of  Grace, 

241. 

New  Obedience,  Lecture  on,  184. 

Necessity  of,  187. 

Nature  and  Limitations  of,  191. 

Ground  of  Obligation  to,  199. 
Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan  Creed,  14. 
Nice,  Council  of,  1 1, 
Nicene  Creed,  9,  14. 
Oaths,  lawfulness  of,  614. 
Obedience,  New,  Lecture  on,  184. 

Necessity  of,  187. 

Nature  and  Limitations  of,  191. 

Ground  of  Obligation  to,  199. 
'Ofioio'vaLog-^  lO    12. 
'O/ioovaia^  lO,  12. 
Optimism,  760. 
Ordinances,  Human,  Lecture  on,  546. 

Necessity  of,  548. 

Classification  of,  556. 

Principles  Regulating,  549,  555. 
Ordination,  493. 
Origin  of  Evil,  Lecture  on,  726. 
Original  Sin,  Lecture  on,  40. 

Papal   form   of   Church   Government, 

574.  576. 

Pelagianism,  703. 

Person  and  Work  of  Christ,   Lecture 
on,  68. 

Person,  in  the  Trinity,  17,  28. 

Person  of  Christ,  jy,  338. 

Power  of  the  Keys,  372. 

Predestination,  707,  720. 
In  relation  to  Faith,  143. 

Pre-existence  of  Souls,  741. 

Presbyterian  form  of  Church  Govern- 
ment, 574. 

Property,  right  of  possessing,  611. 

Protracted  Meetings,  564. 

Providence,  734. 

Punishment,  Capital,  605. 
Eternal,  663. 


\ 


888 


INDEX. 


Recognition,  Heavenly,  659. 
Regeneration,  38. 

Agency  in,  7! 8. 

Distinguished  from  Conversion,  59, 
718. 

Means  of,  719. 

Baptismal,  272. 
Repentance,  Lecture  on,  379. 

Nature  and  Necessity  of,  392. 

And  Forgiveness  as  connected  with 
Baptism,  386. 
Resurrection  of  Christ,  104. 

Of  the  Dead,  647. 

The  two-fold,  688. 
Revivals,  564. 
Revolution,  right  of,  622. 

Sabbath.     See  Lord's  day. 
Sacraments,  LIse  of,  Lecture  on,  398. 
As  Marks  of  the  Christian   Profes- 
sion, 410. 
As  Means  of  Grace,  413. 
Efficacy  of,  according  to  the  Roman 

Church,  422. 
Definition  of,  431, 
Number  of,  401,  433. 
Administration  of,  439. 
Saints,  Invocation  of,  Lecture  on,  834. 
Roman  Dogma  on,  843. 
Origin  of,  848. 

Degrading  to  the  Spiritual  Worship 
of  God,  870.  • 
Samosatenians,  23. 
Satan  the  Cause  of  Sin,  750. 
Second  Advent.     See  Advent. 
Semi-Pelagianism,  707. 
Service,   Modes  of,  in  the  Sanctuary, 

567. 
Sin,  defined,  745. 

Existence  of,    how   reconciled    with 

character  of  God,  758. 
Original,  Lecture  on,  40,     See  749. 
Origin  of,  41. 

Not  the  Substance  of  Man,  42. 
Inherited  from  Adam,  43. 
Contents  of,  43. 
Character  of,  48. 


Consequences  of,  55. 

Cause  of,  Lecture  on,  726. 
Son  of  God,  Eternal  Generation  of,  16. 
Soteriology,  94. 
State.     See  Civil  Affairs. 

And  Church,  relation  between,  573. 
Supralapsarianism,  742. 
Swabach  Articles,  7. 
Synergism,  723. 
Theodicy,  758. 

Times  of  Divine  Service,  556. 
Traducianism,  53. 
Transubstantiation,  Rejected,  331. 
Trinity,  Lecture  on,  5. 

Of  Persons  in  the  Godhead,  15,  25. 

Divinity  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit,  26. 

Testimony  of   Apostolic  Fathers  to 
the  Doctrine  of,  30. 

Objections  to,  31. 
Triune  God,  Creator  and  Preserver  of 

All  Things,  16. 

Unity  of  the  Divine  Essence,  15,  24. 
Universalism,  Doctrine  of,  Condemned, 
663,  677. 

Valentinianism,  21. 
Vestments,  Clerical,  572. 

War,  when  Justifiable,  606. 

Wicked,  Annihilation  of,  a  False  Doc- 
trine, 676. 

Will,  Free,  Lecture  on,  697. 
Defined,  699,  746. 

Woman,  Not  Called  to  the  Office  of  the 
Ministry,  486. 

Works,  Good,  Lecture  on,  184. 
Nature  of,  191. 
Necessity  of,  187. 
Ground  of  Obligation  to  Do,  199, 
Relation  between  Good  Works  and 
P'aith,  644,  767. 

Worship  in  the  Sanctuary,  567. 
Order  of  in  General  Synod,  569. 
Art  in,  571. 

Year,  Christian,  560. 


^' 


.^^.^r,^^^>^ 


DATE  DUE 


G AYLORD 


RINT  EO  IN  U    S    A. 


